Grays Harbor College
Regular Interim Report
for Reaffirmation of Accreditation
March 2006
Contents
Introduction
Part A: Response to General Recommendations in 2001 Self-Study
Evaluation of Goals
Assessment
Library Renovation
Part B: Institutional Changes
Standard I: Mission and Goals, Planning and Effectiveness
Mission and Goals
Planning and Effectiveness
Standard II: Educational Program and Effectiveness
Graduation Requirements
Curriculum, Degrees and Certificates
College Education Centers
Policy 2.2: Educational Assessment
Competency in the Disciplines
Literacy
Critical Thinking
Social and Personal Responsibility
Information Use
2006-09 Assessment Cycle
Standard III: Students
Admissions and Records
Advising and Counseling
Athletics
Financial Aid
Student Programs/Student Activities and Leadership
Job Placement
Title III
TrIO
Standard IV: Faculty
Faculty Characteristics
Faculty Development
Faculty Evaluation
Standard V: Library and Media Services
Library Staffing
Library Facilities
Technology and Information Services
Standard VI: Governance and Administration
Governance
Governing Board
Leadership and Management
1
1
1
2
4
5
5
5
6
7
7
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
16
17
18
18
19
19
19
20
20
21
22
22
22
22
23
24
25
25
25
25
Standard VII: Finance
The Foundation
Standard VIII: Physical Facilities
Standard IX: Institutional Integrity
Policies and Agreements
Informational Materials for Students
Conclusion
26
26
27
28
28
29
29
Appendices
Plan for Improvement 2003-2004
Plan for Improvement 2004-2005
Plan for Improvement 2005-2006
Strategic Planning Committee Membership
Mission, Vision and Values
Strategic Directions
College Goals
Program Planning Template and Matrix
Plan for Educational Assessment 2002
Assessment Cycle 2003
Board Policy 106 Vision Mission Values
Desired Student Abilities: Definitions and Objectives
Title III Table of Funded Projects
List of Grays Harbor College Committees & Changes
Biographies Board of Trustees
Organization Charts
Financial Statement
33
43
47
51
52
53
53
55
67
70
73
74
75
76
78
80
82
Exhibits
Institutional Effectiveness Reports 2002 through 2005
Employer Needs Assessment
Current and graduate student surveys
Strategic Plan for 2006-2008
Board Policy Manual GHC Website
Facilities Master Plan
Instructional Council Minutes 2001-2005
Grays Harbor College Catalog 2006-2007
Division Assessment Notebooks
Annual Student Services Reports
2005-2010 Collective Bargaining Agreement GHC Website
Professional Technical Post Tenure Review and Voc Certification
GHC Foundation Financial Report 2004-2005
Vocational Program Reviews
Online Enrollment Analysis
Minutes Board of Trustees 2001-2005
Budget Books 2001-2005
1
Introduction
In April 2001, Grays Harbor College completed its self-study and hosted representatives of the Northwest
Commission on Colleges and Universities for a 10-year accreditation visit. The Commission’s final report
commended the College for its high level of student services, its well-maintained buildings and grounds,
and its commitment to serving all residents of the service district through distance education. The
Commission also issued three general recommendations to be acted upon: develop a plan for the regular
and systematic evaluation of GHC’s Priority Goals, implement a regular and continuous assessment plan
for every segment of the College; and renovate the Spellman Library in compliance with ADA and safety
regulations. The College community took to heart the recommendations of the Commission and
established full compliance as an institutional priority.
On April 24, 2003, a focused interim visit addressed the College’s progress on two of the general
recommendations: Standard 1.1, the systematic evaluation of the College’s Priority Goals, and Standard
2.2, the assessment of educational outcomes. The College had already complied with the third
recommendation of the Commission by completing a $6.5 million renovation of the Spellman Library. As
a result of the interim visit, the College received a commendation on its progress for compliance with
Standard 1.1. In addition, the Humanities and Communications Division was commended on its
leadership in educational assessment. Though a plan for the assessment of student learning had been
developed by faculty and was being implemented, the evaluator found that not all divisions had
demonstrated significant progress. Specifically, the report noted that “Grays Harbor College has begun
integrating outcomes assessment into its programs. The College community, most particularly, all of the
faculty, need to embrace the importance of ensuring the integrity of student work and the credibility of
degrees and credits it awards. Sufficient documentation that demonstrates the appraisal of educational
program outcomes is still lacking.” As a result, the College hosted a focused interim visit in October
2004.
That visit resulted in praise for the progress the College had made in educational assessment: “The
Committee commends the faculty, staff, and administration for their responsive and collaborative role in
developing a systematic assessment plan to evaluate its educational programs and document student
achievement of program goals.” This work has continued, and the College is proud to report that a
meaningful base of assessment work now exists, a base upon which the College continues to gauge
student achievement of the educational outcomes articulated in the Desired Student Abilities discussed in
detail in Standard II below.
This report reviews and updates the responses to the Commission’s 2001 general recommendations (Part
A) and presents an interim report on institutional changes (Part B). Part B includes an expanded update on
progress in integrating outcomes assessment into the institution’s academic programs, analyzing student
learning outcomes, and using the results to inform the teaching and learning process at GHC.
Part A: Response to General Recommendations from the 2001 Accreditation Visit
1. The committee recommends that Grays Harbor College regularly and systematically evaluate the
priority goals established by the Board and that this evaluation be used to influence planning and
budget allocations. (Standard 1.A – Institutional Mission and Goals)
Following the April 2001 accreditation visit, the College developed a comprehensive system for the
evaluation of its Priority Goals. Working with the Board of Trustees, the College identified multiple
indicators of effectiveness for each of the 10 Priority Goals. Measurement of these indicators is based on
2
qualitative and quantitative data from a wide variety of sources including the results of surveys distributed
among students, faculty, administration, classified staff, and the external community.
The first Institutional Effectiveness Report (see Exhibit 1), presented to the Board in February 2003,
summarized this data and evaluated the College’s Priority Goals. That evaluation was the basis for the
development of a Plan for Improvement, which included a summary of strengths and weaknesses
identified within the report and also established Improvement Objectives and timelines for completion of
those objectives during the following academic year. The Board adopted the Plan for Improvement 200304 (see Appendix 1), in April 2003, and $100,000 was set aside in the budget development process for
requests directly related to meeting the Plan’s objectives. The College set aside an additional $100,000 to
begin development of a strategic planning process. The Office of Institutional Research monitored
progress on the Improvement Objectives, providing regular reports to the President and the Board of
Trustees.
Based on input from the Board, faculty, staff, and administration, the College reviewed both the Priority
Goals and the format of the Institutional Effectiveness Report. The Board decided to combine two existing
Priority Goals, and added a goal that specifically addressed access, a key component of the College’s
Mission. Other recommended changes to the format of the report included the provision of information on
data sources and sample sizes, responses broken out by constituency, peer comparisons, and additional
data on student participation and access. Those changes were implemented in the 2004 report.
An Institutional Effectiveness Committee, which included representatives from all segments of the
College, reviewed the report. Based on an analysis of the data, the committee developed the Plan for
Improvement 2004-05 (see Appendix 2). Members of the campus community were invited to apply for
funding for projects related to the Improvement Objectives contained in the Plan. Those applications
were subsequently reviewed by the Budget Development Committee, and a comprehensive list of projects
was funded to forward the achievement of the College’s Improvement Objectives. During the current
year, this process continued based on the Plan for Improvement 2005-06 (see Appendix 3).
While this process proved effective for short-term planning, the College recognized the need for a
systematic and inclusive planning process that would address longer-range goals and provide for
integration of existing planning, budgeting, and assessment processes. In the 2004-05 operating budget,
$100,000 was allocated for the development of a Strategic Plan designed to guide decision-making and
resource allocation, thus providing a framework for the future. The entire College community has since
been engaged in the development of this plan (see Appendix 4, Strategic Planning Committee), which has
included revision of the College’s Vision, Mission and Values (see Appendix 5); replacement of the 10
Priority Goals with six Strategic Directions; development of 26 College-wide Goals designed to support
achievement of the Strategic Directions (see Appendix 6 & 7); and completion of a two-year program
planning template and planning matrix. The planning matrix, completed by all College program units,
identifies specific Strategies, primary responsibility for achievement of those Strategies, assessment
measures, and potential budget impacts. The Strategic Plan, from the overall Vision, Mission and Values
to the specific action Strategies, is the basis for the budget development process (see Appendix 8).
2. The committee recommends the implementation of a regular and continuous assessment plan for
every segment of the college in compliance with the specificity of Policy 2.2 – Policy on Educational
Assessment.
At the time of the 2001 accreditation visit, the College had been actively engaged in outcomes assessment
at the classroom level for more than 10 years. The Outcomes Assessment Committee had provided the
means to support and fund these endeavors, and the majority of full-time faculty had participated in the
3
effort. The recommendation of the Commission helped the College to focus on development of a
comprehensive and systematic approach that would ensure the evaluation of programs, services, and
student learning beyond the classroom. Grays Harbor College is proud of the significant progress it has
made in response to the Commission’s recommendation. The College has invested in staff development,
conference attendance, in-service training, and financial and clerical support for faculty. The campus
culture related to assessment has improved as faculty, staff and administration have come to more clearly
understand and value the positive impact that assessment can have on student learning and student
success. All faculty, staff and administration have come to view assessment of student learning as an
invaluable part of a College-wide commitment to continuous improvement.
GHC’s Plan for Educational Assessment (see Appendix 9), implemented in fall 2002, is a comprehensive
system of evaluation which requires assessment, documentation, and analysis of student learning at the
course, program, and institutional levels and allocates resources to support changes as indicated through
the assessment process. The Plan contains the following components:
Articulation of Student Learning Outcomes: In an ambitious 2002 project, all full-time faculty revised
course syllabi. Each course objective in each syllabus was linked to the identified student learning
outcomes (Desired Student Abilities or DSAs). The level of emphasis placed on a given DSA in the
course was rated using a 1–4 scale, thus clearly identifying what students are expected to achieve
relevant to the DSAs in a particular course. Syllabi for more than 500 courses were revised to reflect
the DSAs and made available to students on the College’s website. Syllabi for all new courses
submitted for approval through the Instructional Council follow the format developed through the
syllabi project.
The fall 2002 faculty in-service focused on completion of a gap analysis in the wake of the syllabi
project. Using the DSA ratings, divisions were able to determine whether all of the DSAs were
represented within their division, whether the division averages reflected the goals and desired
outcomes of the division, and whether curriculum changes were indicated to address any
shortcomings or over-emphasis.
During fall 2003, faculty developed objectives for each of the five DSAs: Competency in the
Disciplines, Literacy, Critical Thinking, Social and Personal Responsibility, and Information Use.
These objectives serve as the framework for consistent assessment across all divisions. Tracking and
documentation is maintained by the Office of Institutional Research and the Office of the Vice
President for Instruction. Development of a database system has allowed the College to analyze data
at the instructor, course, division, and program level and to ensure that students earning degrees and
certificates at the College have had an opportunity through their coursework to achieve mastery in
each of the DSAs.
Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes: In fall 2003, a three-year Assessment Cycle (see
Appendix 10) was established for the assessment of the College’s Desired Student Abilities across all
divisions. Divisions assessed each DSA over a four-quarter period by engaging in four activities:
developing, piloting, analyzing, and revising/re-analyzing their means of teaching, assigning and
assessing for skills and knowledge relevant to the DSAs. Divisions began assessment of a new DSA
each quarter of the cycle. The Office for Institutional Research monitors and assists division faculty
as they implement this process.
The process used in assessing student outcomes has grown into a comprehensive process for the
appraisal of student work leading to certificates and degrees. That process will continue with minor
changes in the reporting structure. All five DSAs will be assessed by each division annually. Effective
4
July 1, 2006, the College’s Strategic Planning will occur in a two-year cycle with an annual update to
adjust strategies and allocate resources based on progress toward identified strategic goals. The
annual update will report division assessment results using the assessment analysis template from the
previous three-year cycle. The strategic planning document includes a separate section for reporting
assessment results. This new reporting method will more effectively link assessment results to the
College’s mission and goals as well as to resource allocation.
Assessment of Institutional Effectiveness: An annual Institutional Effectiveness Report provides
faculty, staff, and administration with multiple indicators for the evaluation of student learning and
the effectiveness of programs and services. Analysis is based on data from diverse sources including
but not limited to: student work; a comprehensive data warehouse system linking student outcomes
with employment; employer needs assessments (see Exhibit 2); feedback from local advisory groups;
data provided through the community colleges’ statewide Student Management System; and national
and local surveys designed to assess the perceptions of current students and graduates (see Exhibit 3).
Alternative methods of assessing student perceptions are being considered.
As part of the 2005-06 strategic planning process, the College conducted one external and two
internal sessions to gather information about the institution’s current strengths and weaknesses, as
well as the opportunities and threats that will face GHC in the next five years. That information, in
addition to the data contained in the Institutional Effectiveness Report, was used to develop the new
Strategic Directions and College-wide Goals that will guide planning, budget allocation, and
assessment for the College. The program planning templates, which are an integral part of the
strategic planning process for all areas of the College, provide an overview of the history, current
status, and future needs of every segment of the institution. The Office of Institutional Research
conducts institutional assessment activities and provides data to each College program for ongoing
assessment and planning.
Allocation of Resources: Funding to support the assessment process and to implement changes based
on assessment results is available through a number of sources. Funding requests, which must be
clearly linked to improvements in teaching and student learning and prioritized by each division, are
considered in the development of the instructional operating budget after review by the Budget
Development Committee. In addition, dedicated funding has been available to address Improvement
Objectives that have been identified in the Plan for Improvement. The State Board for Community
and Technical Colleges also provides each college in the system with a state allocation to support
Outcomes Assessment projects. Funds are also available under the Title III Strengthening Institutions
grant to support faculty development and improvements in student learning. Finally, funding for
special projects related to specific outcomes can be requested from committees dedicated to issues
relevant to that outcome (e.g. a project related to social/personal responsibility might be funded
through the Diversity/Cultural Awareness Committee).
The College’s progress in implementing the Plan for Educational Assessment is articulated in greater
detail in Standard II below.
3. The committee recommends that the college renovate and remodel the John Spellman Library to
meet safety and access standards. (Standard 8.A.4)
Grays Harbor College has fully complied with the recommendation of the Commission. The College
received $6.5 million in state funding for major renovations, and the facility was completely remodeled
during the 2002-03 academic year. The newly renovated library, which re-opened in fall 2003, meets or
exceeds all safety and access standards and is an asset to Grays Harbor College. Details of this renovation
are part of Standard V below.
5
Part B: Questions Related to Other Institutional Changes
STANDARD I: INSTITUTIONAL MISSION AND GOALS, PLANNING AND EFFECTIVENESS
Mission and Goals
Since the last full accreditation review in 2001, Grays Harbor College has reviewed and made changes to
both the Mission statement and College-wide Goals (previously Priority Goals) of the College. Beginning
in September 2001, Priority Goals established for the College and approved by the Board of Trustees
served as the basis for the Institutional Effectiveness Report. Assessment and evaluation of the Priority
Goals have been published in the annual Institutional Effectiveness Report since 2003. A Plan for
Improvement, based on the data and analysis of the Institutional Effectiveness Report, has also been
developed each year since 2003. Beginning in the 2004-05 fiscal year, allocation of some funding has
been linked directly to the Plan for Improvement. Examples of initiatives supported through this process
include the following:
•
$2,000 to support development of a federal TRIO grant, resulting in the College’s being awarded
a highly competitive five-year grant that provides $220,000 annually to support low-income and
first-generation college students;
•
$2,000 for Diversity Committee activities, including an all-day diversity training workshop for all
staff;
•
$10,000 to support an employer needs assessment comprising personal interviews with more than
50 employers in Grays Harbor and Pacific counties to assess employer satisfaction with GHC
graduates and job market trends within the college district;
$27,000 for Library Media Services, including $10,000 to support part-time library staffing to
expand access for evening and off-campus students, $3,000 to provide “Virtual Reference” to
library patrons, and $13,600 to update program-specific collection materials.
•
A complete listing of institutional improvement initiatives is available as an exhibit.
One Improvement Objective identified in both 2004-05 and 2005-06 was developing a comprehensive
strategic planning process for the College. That process, begun in summer 2004 and involving students,
faculty and staff as well as community members from the private and public sectors, has resulted in the
development of new statements of Vision, Mission, Values, Strategic Directions, College-wide Goals, and
Strategies for the College. The process, implemented during the current year, links directly to budget
development through the Strategies and identified budget needs developed by each program planning unit
of the College. Assessment of the Strategic Plan will be the basis for the Institutional Effectiveness Report
and continuous planning for the College.
The Strategic Plan for 2006-08 (see Exhibit 4) provides a framework for planning in six broad areas:
Instruction, College Climate and Staffing, Communications and Outreach, Resources and Budget, Student
Services, and Technology, Equipment and Facilities. Twenty-six College-wide Goals have been
developed for this two-year period. Specific Strategies developed to accomplish the Goals will be
assessed and updated annually. The Goals will be revisited every two years, and the Vision, Mission,
Values, and Strategic Directions will be reviewed in a five-year cycle. The Vision, Mission, Values and
DSAs were adopted by the Board of Trustees as Board Policy 106 (see Appendix 11) at its meeting on
February 21, 2006 (. In a separate action, the Board approved the Strategic Directions and Goals
developed by the College for the next two years.
6
Because capital project proposals were due to the State Board in December 2005, the Master Facilities
Plan (see Exhibit 6) was updated prior to the completion of the Strategic Plan for 2006-08. This process
invited input from the entire internal community and selected external constituents in a series of meetings
that first assessed the needs of the college and then developed a plan to address those needs. The
Facilities Master Plan proposes replacement or renovation of buildings for the district through the year
2014, and is linked to the College Strategic Plan. Proposals have been submitted through the State
Board’s capital improvement process for a new Science and Math instructional building and a new
Childcare Center, both on the main campus of Grays Harbor College.
Planning and Effectiveness
The College is engaged in a continuous cycle of planning, resource allocation, and assessment of the
Mission and Goals, which are developed collaboratively among College constituents and approved by the
Board of Trustees (see Diagram 2.1 below).
Diagram 2.1 Planning and Assessment Cycle
Continuous Planning Cycle
OTHER PLANNING
•Assessment
•Institutional
Effectiveness
Report
Instructional
Programs
Environmental
Scan
Student Services
•Vision
•Mission
•Values
Implementation
Strategies and
Budget Requests
•Board Approval
Strategic Directions
and Goals
Technology,
Facilities &
Equipment
Resource Development
& Allocation
Communications
& Outreach
College Climate &
Staffing
The annual Institutional Effectiveness Report assesses the Priority Goals based on indicators of
effectiveness for programs and services. The new strategic planning process combines assessment of
programs, student outcomes, and services with budget development in a comprehensive institutional
effectiveness model. Each year, Strategies are assessed to identify revisions and resources necessary to
achieve the College-wide Goals. Those Strategies that identify a potential budget impact are carefully
considered in a budget development and prioritization process. At the end of each academic year, the
achievement of Goals will be assessed by measuring the completion and effectiveness of the Strategies.
7
Adjustments will be made to the Strategies according to their effectiveness in accomplishing the Goals to
which they are linked.
The expectations for the College are expressed in the newly developed Vision, Mission, and Values
statements. These expectations will be assessed annually based on the new Strategic Plan. The six
Strategic Directions indicate the College’s commitment to the evaluation and improvement of
instructional programs; student services; resource development and allocation; college climate and
staffing; communications and outreach; and technology, facilities, and equipment. Annual evaluation of
Strategies will support ongoing planning in a continuous cycle of assessment, budgeting and
improvement.
STANDARD II: EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM AND ITS EFFECTIVENESS
POLICY 2.1: GENERAL EDUCATION / RELATED INSTRUCTION
There have been no changes regarding general education/related instruction since the 2001 accreditation.
Graduation Requirements
Several changes have been made in requirements for graduation since the publication of the 2000-02
catalog.
As the College began serving more distance learning students and more students at the College’s several
Education Centers, it became difficult to provide quality Physical Education activity classes for all
students. The faculty determined that there were other ways that students could learn the importance of
health and wellness and meet the objective of the Social and Personal Responsibility DSA: “Develop an
appreciation for good health habits and physical fitness.” Through the regular curriculum and degree
adoption process and based upon the Instructional Council’s recommendation, the President recognized
the five-credit HPF 101 Health and Wellness course as meeting the PE graduation requirement (see
Exhibit 7, Instructional Council minutes). This change took effect with the publication of the 2002-04
catalog.
Subsequently, the Instructional Council recommended and the President approved the first year of nursing
curriculum to serve as the equivalent of two PE credits. This change will be reflected in the 2006-08
catalog, currently in production. In addition, the Instructional Council recommended and the President
authorized five credits of the Integrative Seminar sequence of courses, approved as part of the
Reservation Based Direct Transfer Agreement Associate in Arts degree, to fulfill one-third of the 15credit humanities distribution requirement for students enrolled in that particular DTA degree.
Curriculum, Degrees, and Certificates
Grays Harbor College regularly and systematically reviews all curricula. Course descriptions and syllabi
are reviewed every two years during the preparation of the College catalog. Proposals involving
prerequisites, course descriptions, course content, and delivery modes are reviewed by the Division
Chairs, after which the Instructional Council makes a recommendation to the President regarding any
changes. A similar process is in place for certificate and degree changes. In addition,
Professional/Technical certificates of 45 credits and greater, as well as Professional/Technical degrees,
are approved by the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges (SBCTC).
Changes made in the Associate in Arts degree since 2001 include several significant adjustments to both
prerequisites and recommended preparation for a variety of courses as well as modifications to course
8
descriptions and the addition of a new course in Science Distribution area C: Geology 107, Introduction
to Weather. Between 2000 and 2005, GHC adopted statewide direct transfer agreements in Business,
Nursing, and three Associate in Science degrees. Specific details of these and other degrees appear in the
2004-2006 Grays Harbor College Catalog (see Exhibit 8). Changes that have occurred in
professional/technical curricula since the College’s full-scale accreditation visit in 2001 are included
Table 2.1. Note that the effective catalog year identifies the year a change appeared in the catalog; for
example, a change made in 2001 would appear in the 2002-04 catalog.
Table 2.1 Professional/Technical Program Changes
PROFESSIONAL/TECHNICAL PROGRAMS ADDED/DISCONTINUED
2000-2005
NOTE: Catalog year identifies the year the catalog the change was implemented. For example, if a program was discontinued
in 2000 or 2001, it would have been eliminated in the 2002-04 catalog.
Catalog Year Program
Degree/Certificate Type Added Discontinued
2000-02
Corrections
Early Childhood Education
Legal Secretary
Machinist Technology
Material Processes/Fabrication
Associate in Applied
Science/Certificate of
Completion
Associate in Applied
Science/Certificate of
Completion
Certificate of
Completion
Associate in Technology
X
X
X
X
Associate in Technology
X
Associate in Applied
Science
Natural Resources Restoration
X
Certificate of
Pharmacy Technician
X
Completion
Certificate of
X
Practical Nursing
Completion
2002-04
Natural Resources Restoration (joint
Associate in Applied
degree)
Science
X
Certificate of
Completion
Health Promotion/Fitness Technician
X
2004-06 **
Certificate of
X
Automotive Technology
Completion
Certificate of
Diesel Technology Fundamentals
X
Completion
Certificate of
Advanced Diesel Technology
X
Completion
Certificate of
X
Human Services
Completion
** These programs had been degree level only. Certificates of Completion were added to give students more
opportunity to gain specific skills and enter the workforce earlier.
9
College Education Centers
College facilities beyond the main campus in Aberdeen have undergone significant growth, expansion,
renovation and refocusing in the five years since the last self-study.
Riverview Education Center: The extensive renovation of the Riverview Education Center in Raymond
has been completed, and classes resumed in the Center in the fall of 2001. Since that time, an Associate of
Arts Direct Transfer degree has become available at the REC. This degree is offered with a significant
portion of the classes available on-site in Raymond, either in face-to-face classes or via Interactive
Television. Online courses round out the AA degree offerings.
Columbia Education Center: A new facility is currently under construction in Ilwaco. Program offerings
have expanded from primarily Community Service and Professional/Technical programs to include an
Associate of Arts Direct Transfer degree, offered through a variety of delivery methods including face-toface, Interactive Television, and online courses. This expansion responds to demand in both community
and Running Start populations.
Simpson Education Center: The Simpson Education Center in Elma has undergone a shift in focus from
Community Service, Professional/Technical, Academic Transfer, and Adult Basic Skills to primarily
Adult Basic Skills and computer-related classes. This shift, established for the 2005-06 academic year,
has occurred because of declining enrollment in Community Service and Academic Transfer courses.
This area of the county has seen a significant population growth among native Spanish speakers. To serve
this growing population, the College has hired a half-time bilingual outreach specialist and increased
English as a Second Language offerings in East county.
Stafford Creek Educational Center: As the offender population at the Stafford Creek Correctional Center
has increased to the designed capacity of approximately 2000, GHC has grown to meet the increased
educational needs. The College currently has 15 full-time faculty located at SCCC, serving
approximately 900 students, producing 500 annual FTE. SCCC offers no degrees but does provide
vocational certificates. All programs and courses offered at SCCC (Offender Change, Adult Basic
Skills/GED Preparation, English as a Second Language, Computer Information Technology Certificate,
Building Maintenance Technology, and Welding) are approved utilizing the same process as on-campus
credit-bearing courses. Additionally, all of the Professional/Technical certificates of 45 credits follow a
SBCTC standardized curriculum and contain the necessary related-instruction courses required by the
NWCCU.
POLICY 2.2: EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT
Grays Harbor College is committed to the five Desired Student Abilities (DSAs) adopted in 1999 and
reaffirmed by faculty, staff and administration in 2001. The DSAs represent the student learning
outcomes that the College deems necessary for all students to achieve through their participation in
programs and coursework at the College. While the DSAs cover broad categories of abilities, the College
has thoughtfully developed them, as well as the more specific objectives that are linked to them, to guide
educational planning and assessment at the course and program levels.
Grays Harbor College’s Five Desired Student Abilities are: Competency in the Disciplines, Literacy,
Critical Thinking, Social and Personal Responsibility, and Information Use. Descriptions of these DSAs,
as well as the major objectives relevant to each ability, appear in Appendix 12.
10
All divisions are nearing the completion of an ambitious three-year assessment cycle. For each of the five
DSAs, the assessment cycle comprises development of performance criteria, description of strategies
employed to help students perform, development of assessments to measure student performance,
collection of sample student work, analysis of student work in light of performance criteria, and
recommendations regarding future strategies, assignments and assessments. This initial cycle forms the
basis upon which ongoing development, collection, analysis, and revision can occur.
Assessment documentation has three audiences. For the division, cycle documentation provides the
framework for improvements in the teaching and learning process and allows faculty to describe and
assess what is of value to the instructor, the discipline and the institution. For the institution, cycle
documentation provides a framework for sharing the strategies and assessments that lead to success and
allows divisions to make evidence-backed claims regarding both successes and resource needs. For
external audiences (e.g. accreditors, the public), cycle documentation allows the college to demonstrate
that students who leave GHC with a degree have achieved the Desired Student Abilities. It also provides
evidence of the college’s commitment to assessment and to the improvement of student learning.
Assessment of Desired Student Abilities Across the Divisions
The following sections provide brief descriptions of only a few of the many specific examples of
assessment work carried out in the instructional divisions. Thorough descriptions of each division’s work
in outcomes assessment, with accompanying data, are held in Division Assessment Notebooks maintained
by the Office of Institutional Research (see Exhibit 9).
DSA #1: Competency in the Disciplines
From the Science and Mathematics Division
Project/Activity: Assessing Disciplinary Learning in Pre-Nursing Biology Courses
Status: Assessment, Analysis completed; Action ongoing
Assessment: The Biology Department met in fall 2003 and developed a matrix for disciplinary learning to
be used in four biology courses taken by pre-nursing students: General Biology, Nutrition, Anatomy and
Physiology, and Microbiology. Faculty worked to evaluate whether students who completed Anatomy
and Physiology (AP) I and II were adequately prepared for entrance into the Nursing program. Faculty
administered a survey designed to gather student input into the effectiveness of the AP courses as they are
taught at GHC and to determine what kinds of changes could improve the quality of the courses. The
survey method included a 43-part questionnaire followed by focus groups. Data gathered included student
background, outcomes as related to all five DSAs, and evaluation of methods of instruction.
Analysis: Twenty-one second-year nursing students completed the survey. Twenty of the students had
completed both quarters of AP at the college while one student had transferred into AP II from another
college. Eighteen (86%) of the students completed both quarters of AP prior to entering the nursing
program. The other three students completed AP while enrolled in the nursing program. Student
perceptions related to DSA #1 in the context of AP I and II indicate that most (95% -100%) felt the
objectives had been met “very well” or “well” and all felt that AP prepared them for more detailed studies
in the areas of health and medicine. Students noted that the course content is extensive and challenging.
Some content needs more or less emphasis, e.g., AP does not cover the digestive system and liver, nor
does the nutrition course cover the digestive system in enough depth. Expansion of the course sequence to
three quarters would enhance student learning.
11
Recommendations/Actions Taken: Further analysis of student perceptions indicates that the AP
curriculum is difficult, extensive and constantly evolving from an ever-increasing foundation of scientific
research. Student outcomes in this course would be greatly enhanced by expansion of the course from a
two-quarter to a three-quarter sequence. Faculty will explore the feasibility of making AP a three-quarter
sequence. Additionally, curriculum for Biology 101 has been enhanced to help prepare students for
transfer into AP I. AP students will be surveyed at the end of spring quarter to collect more information
about how well Biology 101 is preparing students to transfer to higher level courses.
From the Industrial Technologies Division
Project/Activity: Assessing Skill Competency in the Welding Program
Status: Assessment, Analysis and Action completed
Assessment: In order to successfully complete their sixth quarter in the welding program, students must
pass the Washington Association of Building Officials (WABO) welder qualification (certification) tests
for welding in all positions with at least two different welding processes. Students must also demonstrate
mastery of basic welding trade knowledge and theory during their sixth quarter through successful
completion of a four-part capstone exam. This project gathered data on student success relative to these
standards.
Analysis: Analysis of student performance revealed an unreasonably high success rate on the WABO
tests, even for students with modest skills. Faculty determined that the acceptable standard was too low
and did not challenge students to excel. The capstone exam appears to be a good tool for demonstrating
welding knowledge and theory.
Recommendation/Actions Taken: As of fall quarter 2005, the minimum standard has been raised to
require passing the certification tests for groove welding in all positions with the GTAW, FCAW, and
SMAW welding processes. No changes were made to the capstone exam.
DSA #2: Literacy
From the Adult Basic Education/Developmental Education Division
Project/Activity: Assessing Literacy as a Factor in Transfer from ABE to Developmental/College-Level
Status: Assessment, Analysis completed; Action ongoing
Assessment: Division faculty aimed to determine the effectiveness of assessments at gauging student
progress toward literacy and explore the hypothesis that one roadblock for many students is the transition
from ABE to developmental or college-level coursework. The data reveal that only a small percentage of
ABE/ESL students continue in higher education after completing ABE classes, perhaps because of
unfamiliarity and discomfort with college-level course work. To test this theory, the division piloted
curriculum changes in ABE to assess whether students’ comfort level and knowledge impacted their
transition to more advanced classes. Assessments were collected in English 060, Reading 080, 090, 120,
Math 058, 060, 093, and On-Campus ABE/GED classes. Assessments included standardized tests (TABE
and Nelson Denney) as well as exams, essays, and a pre/post test. The curriculum change piloted in the
on-campus ABE class involved adding a transition component to the last hour of the 9 am – 1 pm class.
On average, 7 students attended this “extra” session. Students learned to complete admission forms,
financial aid forms and enrollment forms. They became acquainted with the quarterly schedule and
catalog and completed an annual academic plan. They previewed college textbooks, toured the campus,
and became familiar with different departments and the library. Guest speakers from counseling and
financial aid attended. Once a week students visited college-level classes.
12
Analysis: At the end of the quarter, students wrote evaluations that included positive feedback about class
activities and the knowledge acquired during the quarter. Students expressed more confidence about both
their plans to continue their educations and their chances for success. However, the anticipated outcome –
that these students will transfer into developmental or college-level courses at a higher rate than is typical
– can only be assessed in the future when these students complete their ABE coursework. Even though
the activities benefited the students, further development is needed in helping students make the transition
to the next level of education at the College. The data collected from student work show that students are
making progress in literacy. The division is attempting to make documentation of that progress clearer
and is implementing new course material/techniques to enhance student learning.
Recommendations/Actions Taken: The division recommends development of a class that will help to
successfully transition students from ABE through developmental courses, if needed, and on to collegelevel work.
From the Humanities and Communications Division
Project/Activity: Assessing Inter-Rater Reliability in English Composition
Status: Assessment completed; Analysis ongoing; Action forthcoming
Assessment: Division faculty are conducting an ongoing outcomes assessment project designed to
confirm that desired student outcomes, academic standards and assessment practices within the English
department (and specifically among instructors of English 101) are well aligned. Although the faculty
articulate similar outcomes, similar assignments, and similar assessment rubrics, they have found they do
not reliably know precisely what that means in terms of the relationship between the quality of individual
students’ work in different sections of English 101 and the grades/scores those students earn.
Analysis: During winter quarter 2006, faculty met to develop a single essay assignment and
accompanying assessment rubric that will be piloted in multiple sections of English 101 during spring
quarter 2006. During spring quarter members will work together to engage in blind critique and
assessment of a sampling of the papers created by students in response to the assignment. Establishing
inter-rater reliability will ensure consistent evaluation of student work across the division.
Recommendations/Actions Taken: So far, this project has resulted in the creation of an adaptable
assignment, with a standardized rubric that includes clearly articulated performance criteria labeled
according to DSAs in the works. Project participants anticipate gathering student writing samples during
spring quarter 2006 and creating a matrix of scoring by multiple faculty participants for each sample. The
results will demonstrate the extent to which the English Department achieves inter-rater reliability in the
assessment of student writing and indicate whether further cooperation is needed to assure a healthy level
of consistency.
DSA #3: Critical Thinking
From the Nursing/Health Sciences Division
Project/Activity: Assessing Critical Thinking via the Nursing Care Plan Grading Tool
Status: Assessment, Analysis, and Action completed
Assessment: During 2004-05, faculty in the nursing program evaluated the effectiveness of the nursing
care plan grading tool used to measure critical thinking. Using a sample of student care plans, the
assessment helped to establish inter-rater reliability of this tool among instructors. The care plans are used
throughout the nursing program to evaluate critical thinking and problem-solving skills related to the
nursing process.
13
Analysis: In this assessment, 100% of second-year students obtained a grade of 90% or more on the care
plans, graded with the nursing care plan tool. Results of this assessment indicate success as far as teaching
nursing process and prioritizing patient care, but revisions will continue to be made to enhance the
students’ learning.
Recommendations/Actions Taken: Assessment activities can be improved by clarifying assignment
directions to ensure increased success of outcomes. A clinical performance grading tool was re-designed
to better assess student achievement of the Desired Student Abilities. This tool has been used for two
quarters to evaluate students’ progress in the clinical area and in clinical testing matters.
From the Industrial Technologies Division
Project/Activity: Assessing Critical Thinking in Creating Carpentry Materials Lists
Status: Assessment, Analysis completed; Action ongoing
Assessment: Faculty collected student work in response to a variety of carpentry task assignments in
which students were asked to develop accurate material lists using information found on construction
drawings.
Analysis: The analysis of student work showed that beginning students performed poorly on this task.
Advanced students, who had experience with hands-on construction through working on the home built
by the carpentry department the previous year, scored considerably better. First-year students who asked
questions about unclear information on the drawings did much better and gained a much clearer
understanding of the construction processes prior to doing the work. It appears that the drawings currently
in use are not detailed enough for students with little or no experience in construction to accurately
complete the assignments.
Recommendation/Actions Taken: Construction drawings will be revised to provide a greater level of
detail. Because one of the objectives for critical thinking clearly states that students must solve problems
by combining and applying knowledge from multiple sources, students will be provided more research
opportunities. Students will experience less lecture and more reading assignments using web sites and
articles which will help them better understand the different construction processes.
DSA #4: Social and Personal Responsibility
From the Humanities and Communications Division
Project/Activity: Assessing Social/Personal Responsibility via Peer Review and Critique
Status: Assessment completed; Analysis and Actions ongoing
Assessment: The English faculty have found that peer review and critique tend to provide more benefit to
the reviewer/critic, who discovers what and how others write, than it does to the writer, who often
receives inconsistently useful or even counterproductive advice from peers. This assessment activity
examines current practices in order to improve the effectiveness of peer review and critique as a useful
tool for revision. The process will also provide clearer/better links between peer review and critique
processes across the writing sequence. Although this activity addresses disciplinary learning, literacy and
critical thinking, its primary focus is on the social responsibility of helping peers to improve their writing.
Analysis: A comparative analysis of both processes and results as they occur in English composition
classes taught by a variety of instructors and in creative writing courses taught by a single instructor
indicates that some of the standard review/critique practices involved in the creative writing workshop
(group critique, oral critique in addition to written critique, structured focus on both strengths and
14
suggestions for revision) may be of use in the composition classroom, perhaps even as a replacement for
the standard practice of trading papers for review and providing only written critiques.
Recommendations/Actions Taken: Faculty will pilot some of the more public review and critique
practices in composition classes during spring quarter 2006. Additional plans include developing a rubric
designed to define and assess successful peer assistance.
From the Social Science and Physical Education Division
Project/Activity: Assessing Social/Personal Responsibility in the Criminal Justice Program
Status: Assessment, Analysis completed; Action ongoing
Assessment: During fall quarter 2004, students in CJUS 101, Understanding the Criminal Justice System,
were assigned a short-essay research paper. Students were given a specific legal case-study in law
enforcement that related to the relationship between the police and the court system and asked to evaluate
the arrest procedures of a police officer as well as the impact of trial and appellate court rulings upon the
actions of that officer. The assessment rubric for Social and Personal Responsibility outcomes developed
by the Social Science division was used to evaluate Performance Criterion I: Respect (Self-Control),
Performance Criterion II: Participation (Involvement), and Performance Criterion III: Self-Direction
(Self-Responsibility).
Analysis: Students demonstrated their ability to show respect and self-control in the research project by
doing their own research in gathering information regarding the case-study, and to show self-control by
insuring the proper format was used and the paper was turned in at the appropriate time. They
demonstrated their participation during the discussion of the case-study and their ability to work without
direct supervision throughout the stages of the research assignment. The grading criteria assigned to the
case-study covered three categories, and included content, grammar, and presentation. The content aspect
received the highest possible points, indicating research and understanding of the topic. Grammar
received the second highest point content, and is an accepted part of grading student papers. Finally,
presentation covered discussion in class of the topic assignment and turning the paper in at the designated
time. An unexpected outcome was the number of students who failed to turn their papers in on time, and
the number of papers turned in with a high number of grammatical errors.
Recommendations/Action Taken: This assessment effectively covers student behavior as well as student
responsibilities. Faculty recommend that more emphasis be placed on a student’s personal understanding
of the assignment and how the DSA applies. In the future, more time will be devoted to explaining the
social and personal responsibilities of the students while completing the case-study research assignment.
This will occur when the assignment is given to the students. Class discussion will further ensure that all
students are aware of the requirements and are prepared to succeed on the assignment.
DSA #5: Information Use
From the Business Division
Project/Activity: Assessing Electronic Information Use in Computer and Office Technology Classes
Status: Assessment, Analysis and Action completed
Assessment: The division selected two courses to assess for student use of information resources. For CIS
125, Internet Fundamentals, faculty developed and piloted a rubric to assess student competency in
information resources. In OFTC 220, Office Procedures and Ethics, students were assigned special
projects which required them to respond to a specific information resource topic directly related to the
course work of Office Procedures and Ethics. Faculty developed a rubric to assess student achievement of
this outcome.
15
Analysis: In CIS 125, students demonstrated proficiency in locating and retrieving information from the
internet, following written instructions and directions, knowledge of internet terms and basic commands,
and linking information from one document to another. However, 40% of students were unsuccessful
when asked to evaluate the information content and sources critically. Some students appeared to lack
basic computer skills. In OFTC 220, students demonstrated a ± 100% effective and efficient ability to
locate and access information, a ± 90% ability to evaluate information content and sources critically, and
a ± 77% ability to use appropriate information to draw accurate conclusions.
Recommendations/Actions Taken: Based on the results of the pilot, the instructor has revised course
outcomes for CIS 125. Those outcomes now include the ability to determine the extent and nature of the
information needed and the ability to identify a variety of types and formats of potential sources of
information. Special projects assignments in OFTC 220 have been revised to include a greater emphasis
on the ability to use information appropriately. For example, one project requires students to visit ten
Internet vendor sites, gather specific data, and prepare a formal hard copy presentation. An evaluation
rubric is used to measure student success. Across the division, faculty agree that information use is an
important skill and intend to make additional changes, such as incorporating library orientation sessions
into Business Management classes, requiring students to use outside sources for case studies in Marketing
classes, and requiring students to use the internet to complete software application tasks in CIS 102 and
150.
From the Social Science and Physical Education Division
Project/Activity: Assessing Information Use via Research Projects
Status: Assessment, Analysis completed; Action ongoing
Assessment: During 2004-05, the Social Sciences division piloted an information use assessment and
collected data from students. This assessment involved close analysis of specific research-based
assignments in two division classes: CJUS/HPE 151 (Drugs and Our Society) and PSYCH 100 (General
Psychology). Faculty first identified a specific assignment by type, developed an appropriate assessment
tool to measure student mastery of information-use skills, and then assigned and assessed the student
work. In the CJUS class, the assignment was the design of a drug-prevention program for a high school
and the assessment tool was a rubric based on articulated performance criteria. For the PSYCH class, the
assignment was a research paper and the assessment tool a modified rubric focused on information use.
Analysis: Faculty discovered that students in the criminal justice class expressed their mastery of the DSA
better in writing than orally, while students in the psychology class displayed a wide variety of skill levels
in research methods and writing. Faculty also found that students often achieved minimal competency on
the rubric even if their use of research resources was below the minimum required by the terms of the
assignment. Finally, students seemed to have difficulty using information once they had gathered it. One
positive discovery was that more time spent on teaching meaningful research led students to have more
personal interest in their projects.
Recommendations/Actions Taken: Division members agree that skills in information use are crucial for
students who are assigned research projects and papers, and plan to devote more time to instruction in
research methodology. Other plans include providing lists of resources at the beginning of the quarter,
and dedicating more class time not only to building information-use skills, but also to instilling
motivation to use information sources.
16
The Assessment Cycle: 2006-09
The College believes it has made significant progress in “closing the loop,” or bringing about significant
changes that result in improvement to student learning. The process for the assessment of student
learning remains the same. We will continue to focus on meaningful revisions in response to analysis of
data. An additional emphasis for future assessment work will involve providing documentation of
quantitative data that support assessment analysis.
Each of the five DSAs will be assessed by divisions annually. The components of the assessment process
will echo those used in the three-year cycle just completed: establishing/revising performance criteria;
developing new or revised strategies/instruments to assess student achievement of the criteria; piloting
strategies/instruments in selected courses; analyzing the data collected to determine what curricular or
pedagogical changes might be indicated; implementing changes; and re-analyzing to determine the effect
of the implemented changes on student learning. Divisions may document the process using either the
assessment and analysis matrices designed by the Office of Institutional Research or alternative methods,
provided that the documentation contains each of the components listed above for each of the five DSAs.
Effective with the new assessment cycle, divisions will document their work in the assessment section of
the college’s biennial Strategic Plan. In alternate years, divisions will submit assessment documentation
to the Office of Institutional Research. As in the past cycle, documentation will include discrete analysis
for each DSA; however, data on all five DSAs will be compiled in one document rather than separate
pieces reported quarterly. Division chairs have responsibility for reporting division assessment results on
the following timeline:
July 2006 – June 2007
Divisions complete assessment cycle for each of the five DSAs
By the end of fall 2007
Divisions report results to Institutional Research using above guidelines
July 2007 – June 2008
Divisions complete assessment cycle for each of the five DSAs
By the end of fall 2008
Divisions report results in the Strategic Plan using above guidelines
After this three-year cycle, the college will begin work on its 10-year Accreditation Self-Study scheduled
for 2011. At this time, the College community will evaluate whether the Desired Student Abilities as
currently stated still describe the student outcomes that the institution values.
STANDARD III: STUDENTS
The Student Services Division continues to conduct both yearly student satisfaction surveys and internal
self-assessments. Results from both are utilized in setting program goals and improving services to
students. Student Services has initiated several improvement efforts during the past five years. For
example, in fall 2004, the internal self-evaluation revealed that providing a convenient means for
gathering ideas or questions would be useful, so a suggestion box was created and is now in use. A
concern regarding the coordination of hours with the Business Office led to the Vice President for Student
Services initiating meetings with the Assistant Dean for Financial Services to coordinate not only hours,
but roles and services of the two departments. Similar issues and concerns arise each year and existing
assessment practices provide a vehicle for learning about areas where improvement is needed. Other
changes made in response to identified student needs include a new book loan service, an emergency
fund, and a fund to assist high school completion students. Further, in spring 2003 the students approved
a new comprehensive fee that covers the cost of assessment testing, parking, bus passes, and graduation.
17
Student Services departments provide yearly summaries of their goals, achievements and challenges,
which are combined into the Annual Student Services Report (see Exhibit 10) initiated in 2001-02. Each
year departments describe their successes in achieving their yearly goals and set goals for the coming
year. In addition, a system for area program review began with an evaluation of the Financial Aid and
Admissions/Records programs. Counseling/Advising and Student Activities/Leadership are currently
undergoing review.
Admissions and Records
Admissions policies and procedures have remained consistent since 1999. The number of students taking
Washington Online (WAOL) courses has increased from 33 annual FTE in 2000-2001 to 161 annual FTE
in 2004-2005. The year past saw a substantial increase in Basic Skills enrollments (see Table 3.1), while
the ratio of full-time to part-time students has fluctuated within five percent of an even proportion (see
Table 3.2).
Table 3.1 Basic Skills Enrollments
Year
Student headcount
2000-01
1011
2001-02
1113
2002-03
1170
2003-04
1007
2004-05
1302
Table 3.2 Students by Enrollment Status
Year
Full-time
%
Fall 2000
1426
48
Fall 2001
1388
54
Fall 2002
1230
50
Fall 2003
1347
54
Fall 2004
1262
56
Fall 2005
1096
45
Part-time
1585
1178
1240
1131
989
1366
%
53
46
50
46
44
55
Enrollments since 2000 have increased substantially when all fund sources are considered, while statefunded annual FTE have remained relatively constant, with the exception of an increase in 2001-02 (see
Table 3.3).
Table 3.3 Student Enrollment
Year
Total Headcount
(all fund sources)
2000-01
6130
2001-02
6492
2002-03
6500
2003-04
6688
2004-05
6665
Annual FTE
(all fund sources)
2015
2403
2361
2323
2399
Annual FTE
(state funded)
1703
1829
1724
1736
1719
18
The department’s only personnel change occurred when the Curriculum Advisor, formerly assigned to the
Counseling/Advising Center, was moved to Admissions. This change facilitated a more logical flow of
paperwork within Admissions and placed the College’s transcript evaluation process, performed by the
Curriculum Advisor, in closer proximity to the Registrar, who is ultimately responsible for such
evaluations.
In another significant change, Education Center sites can now be involved in registration meetings via
ITV, which improves communication among all sites. During the last year the College formed an
Enrollment Management Committee, which includes the Marketing Committee.
In 2003-04 the Admissions & Records office set many effectiveness indicators, including processing all
student admission notices within one week and increasing student satisfaction with advising and
registration processes by 2%. The 2004-05 report notes that not all admissions letters were processed
within one week so the goal was reset for 2005-06. The student satisfaction rate for advising and
registration processes increased by 1% rather than 2% so that goal was also rolled over for the next year.
Advising and Counseling
Since 2001 the College has filled two vacated counseling positions and in 2004 hired a new Director of
Advising and Counseling. The Perkins-funded part-time position has been combined with the
WorkSource Center position to create one full-time position that maximizes service to students in Worker
Retraining and Professional/Technical programs.
A counselor now provides services at our Whiteside Center, which serves primarily ABE/GED students.
Other additions include a part-time hourly advisor to serve students attending the Riverview Center, and a
full-time staff member’s regular visits to the Ilwaco Center to advise students. Student evaluations
indicate that the online orientation developed several years ago is useful. The College has implemented
group entry advising as well in order to serve more students and to provide an orientation. Last year,
group advising expanded to include a payment consultant who meets with students following advising to
discuss payment deadlines and financial options. Anecdotal information indicates this has been helpful to
students.
Assessment testing has been expanded to include the WritePlacer, an online essay component. This has
been in use only a few weeks, so effectiveness is yet to be determined. The department will work with
faculty to review cutoff scores and recommend course placements. Last year, the College began offering
placement testing in area high schools, and expects that the program will be expanded this year. Since the
College’s last report, percentages of incoming students placing below college level in English and math
have remained relatively constant, while the percentage of students unprepared for college-level reading
has increased steadily (see Table 3.4).
Table 3.4 Students Testing Below College Level
Quarter
English
Reading
Fall 2000
66%
46%
Fall 2001
61%
46%
Fall 2002
60%
48%
Fall 2003
60%
50%
Fall 2004
60%
54%
Fall 2005
66%
59%
Math
86%
92%
85%
87%
85%
85%
19
Athletics
A new Athletic Director began employment in January 2005 when the incumbent became the College’s
new Title III Director. In addition, a part-time assistant joined the staff in fall 2004 to help with the
extensive work load of this office.
Financial Aid
In 2003-04, the Office of Financial Aid set the goal of reducing the loan default rate to below 14% and
implemented new default prevention measures to address that goal. The process has been successful, with
the default rate decreasing from a high of 23.3% in 2001 to 12.8% for the 2004 cohort – the last year for
which data are available (see Table 3.5).
Table 3.5 Default Rates
Year
Rate of Default
2000
16.10%
2001
23.30%
2002
18.80%
2003
13.40%
2004
12.80%
In other changes since the arrival of a new Director of Financial Aid in 2000, the academic progress
policy has been modified to allow students an additional quarter before being suspended. In 2003, the
department established the goal of raising student satisfaction rates by 5%; in 2004-05 satisfaction rates
had increased by 2.5%, so the department has set a new goal of improving by 2% in 2005-06. Finally, to
assist students in making payments, the College has created a student emergency loan program, which has
been instrumental in allowing students facing difficulties to remain in school.
Student Programs
This area is now called Student Activities and Leadership programs, a title that better reflects its focus
and is better understood by students. A new leadership class will be piloted in 2006. In addition the
coordinator has instituted participation in the AmeriCorps Service program. Also new is a program of
transfer trips, developed in conjunction with the Counseling Center, providing opportunities for students
to visit four-year colleges and universities in the state.
Career Development and Placement Center
The Coordinator for Career Development and Placement is no longer a co-located position funded by the
local Employment Security office. With the loss of those funds, the position is now funded by the College
using WorkFirst and Worker Retraining funds.
Title III
In 2004, the Department of Education awarded Grays Harbor College a Title III Strengthening
Institutions grant which focuses on the “Improvement of Academic Programs, Faculty Development and
Student Services.” This five-year federal grant provides $365,000 annually and covers the period October
2004 – October 2009. Included in the primary objective are four specific areas of emphasis: improving
the transition rate of students who begin in ABE/ESL/GED and developmental education courses;
20
supporting faculty development activities that will increase student success; developing student services
that improve the student’s overall experience; and enhancing institutional research and assessment.
In the sixteen months since receiving the grant, the College has made progress in all four areas. Programs
being piloted to improve the rate of transition for under-prepared students include the following:
•
Addressing success rates in developmental math courses by linking a developmental math class
with a college study skills course emphasizing strategies for dealing with math anxiety and testtaking skills. Assessment results show that on average students in the linked courses earned a
higher grade in the math class and attained a higher quarterly GPA. Staff continue to collect and
analyze data on these courses, including student feedback, to determine the best model for future
offerings.
•
A new career survey course targeting ABE/GED students was offered in winter 2006. This course
helps students explore career options while gaining the skills needed to be successful at college
and in the workplace. Staff will conduct focus groups to assess the impact of this strategy.
•
In summer 2005, three faculty members from the Developmental Education Division attended the
Kellogg Institute to complete an intensive one-month faculty development course. As a result of
the training, faculty implemented new teaching strategies in developmental reading courses
during the 2005-06 school year. Assessment will provide data on whether those changes improve
the rate at which students advance at least one grade level.
The primary focus for improving student services in the first year of the Title III grant has been the
development of a learning center and tutoring program. The College now has a fully-functioning learning
center that has resulted in a 56% increase in the use of tutoring services and a 242% increase in students’
satisfaction with tutoring services. As of January 2006, students were utilizing the learning center and its
services at a rate of nearly 1,200 visits per month. Learning center staff have also developed student
success workshops which they offer throughout the quarter. At the beginning of each quarter a day-long
student success conference, developed in collaboration with the developmental education faculty,
provides students with a variety of workshops on everything from study skills to financial aid and transfer
information. Learning assistive software purchased for math and GED test preparation has been installed
in the learning center and at all off-campus education centers.
A final emphasis of the grant is institutional research and assessment, specifically targeting program level
assessment. To support that effort, funding has been provided within the grant to hire a research analyst
for the Office of Institutional Research. Projects completed include administration and analysis of the
Community College Survey of Student Engagement, completion of the annual Institutional Effectiveness
Report, and development of a new college Strategic Plan. Each grant project/activity is also developed
with clearly established assessment criteria in place. Results are evaluated and analyzed and appropriate
changes are made based on the assessment. Institutional research provides baseline data, assists with the
development of appropriate assessment measures, and assesses outcomes.
TRIO
In fall 2005, the College received for the first time a four-year Student Support Services grant under the
federal TRIO program, designed to provide intensive support to 160 first-generation, low-income and/or
disabled students who are in transfer majors. Three staff members assist students in improving academic
planning, remediating academic deficiencies, setting goals, enhancing study skills, securing financial aid
and transferring to four-year universities. Success of the program is based on the successful completion of
eight program objectives, which are evaluated quarterly and reported on a yearly basis. The College
21
anticipates that at least 70% of program participants will earn a 2.0 GPA in their developmental course
work, that 70% of the program participants will maintain a 2.0 cumulative GPA each quarter, that 60% of
each year’s cohorts will be retained, graduate, or transfer to a four-year school, and that 42% of each
year’s cohort will graduate or transfer within 3 years. Data will be collected through TRIO program
resources as well as through institutional research. Quarterly evaluations will help the TRIO staff to
make adjustments to better meet the objectives of the grant.
STANDARD IV: FACULTY
Several significant policy changes have affected faculty since the 2001 accreditation visit. Effective with
the 2005-2010 Collective Bargaining Agreement (see Exhibit 11 GHC Website), the number of contracted
days per academic year has changed from 175 to a range of 173 to 175 for on-campus faculty. In addition,
the SCCC faculty contract has been revised to allow for a 215-day calendar, resulting in salary being
spread out over a full year instead of ten months. Pay periods for part-time faculty have been revised to
allow for payment twice a month instead of once a month, and full-time faculty may choose from a
variety of payment options. In an additional change, the most recent CBA removed coaching
responsibilities from the bargaining unit and the contract.
The full-time faculty salary schedule has been revised, raising the lowest starting salary from $30,320 to
$31,789 and the highest salary from $51,960 to $54,477. Categories in the Professional/Technical tracks
were revised in the current CBA to reflect the changes in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) for
Professional/Technical Certification. Load ratio calculations for all Professional/Technical faculty were
reduced in September 2001 from 4:1 to 2:1 for non-lecture contact. Additionally, the load ratio for
Nursing faculty’s clinical hours is now 1.2:1.
The College has matched the amount of money allocated from the state legislature for part-time faculty
salary increases both times an allocation was available. As a result, part-time faculty salaries have
increased substantially from $323.70 per quarter load hour in 2001 to $414.79 per quarter load hour
effective July 1, 2005. Counseling and Library faculty salaries are $29.43 and $33.01 per hour. Senior
Education faculty receive $17.66 to $19.12 per hour, and non-instructional (non-student contact) ancillary
faculty receive $29.43 to $31.86 per hour.
Faculty Characteristics
In the years since the 2001 accreditation visit, the College has shifted its ratio of part-time to full-time
faculty by steadily increasing the number of full-time positions and therefore the proportion of courses
taught by full-time faculty (see Table 4.1).
Table 4.1 Ratio of Part-Time and Full-Time Faculty
Year
# of PT
PT% of
# of FT
faculty
faculty
faculty
(head count)
(head count)
(head count)
FT% of
faculty
(head count)
FTE
faculty
2000-01
215
78.5
59
21.6
119
2001-02
202
78.0
57
22.0
126
2002-03
171
75.0
57
25.0
120
2003-04
164
72.8
61
27.1
114
2004-05
155
70.4
65
29.5
116
22
Faculty Development
The processes in place during the last accreditation visit continue to operate unchanged; however, the
Title III Strengthening Institutions grant has enhanced resources and opportunities for faculty
development in a number of ways.
The faculty development component of the Title III program focuses resources on the exploration,
integration and evaluation of learning/teaching strategies and other aspects of the college experience to
support and stimulate change for the College. Faculty apply for funds to attend training, workshops or
conferences as well as for supplemental contracts for special projects or release time (on a limited basis).
Faculty may also apply for funding to support curriculum development and/or revision. Departments and
divisions may also request funding for learning/teaching-related technological equipment or software.
The expected outcomes of faculty grant activities funded through Title III include increased course/goal
completion rates through the improvement of learning assistance to students; improved progression and
transition of students from pre-college to college-level programs; strengthened learning in academic
programs and services; enhanced skill in counseling and teaching diverse students; improvement in
advising, course and career placement; accurate, ongoing assessment and analysis; and increased capacity
of the College to retain and assist all students.
Since its first funded projects in spring 2005, the Title III program has funded 22 separate proposals
ranging from conference attendance to curriculum development projects to the creation of a guide for
part-time faculty in mathematics. To date, Title III has allocated $15,580 to 18 faculty members across
five divisions (see Appendix 13).
Faculty Evaluation
Evaluations of full-time tenured and probationary faculty as well as non-tenure-track faculty are carried
out according to the terms of Article VIII of the CBA. The College has strengthened the role of the tenure
committee in the evaluation of probationary faculty during the last five years by encouraging the
committee’s focus on formative evaluation, which includes an articulated follow-through process for any
problems noted as well as a self-evaluation process that calls for the probationer’s responsiveness to all
committee suggestions.
Post-tenure evaluation has been changed from a three-year cycle to a five-year cycle, which meets the
criteria of the new Policy 4.1 on Faculty Evaluation. Post-tenure review and certification for
Professional/Technical faculty are now on the same cycle and will be completed by the Dean of
WorkForce Education. Although all post-tenure review continues to include classroom observation by an
administrator, student evaluations, and self-evaluation, the peer evaluation that is optional for academic
faculty is now required in the Professional/Technical certification process. Grays Harbor College has
revised its Professional/Technical Certification processes and timelines to meet the new requirements
specified in Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 131-16 (see exhibit 11).
STANDARD V: LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES
Library/Media Services
Library Staffing
Library Media Services’ staffing has been revised: the professional administrative assistant position was
eliminated and replaced with a classified Library Paraprofessional. The salary savings allowed increases
23
in part-time librarians, part-time classified staff, and an upgrade of an existing classified position, which
have allowed the library to open one additional evening per week both part-time librarians and part-time
classified staff, which have allowed the library to open one additional evening per week. Also, the student
technology fee supports a half-time Instructional Technician for the Media Lab, allowing improved help
for students and allowing the new Library Paraprofessional to devote more time to tasks such as ordering
and cataloging. As a result, the College has increased its total Library Media Services staffing to 5.74
FTE during a typical week. Although this staffing level still trails that of peer institutions by 0.93 FTE, it
does represent improvement.
Library Facility
An extensive renovation successfully addressed the Commission’s concerns regarding safety and access
in the library facility. Library Media Services gained some 3,500 square feet in the renovation. This
additional square footage improved comfort for users, larger study carrels and inviting lounge seating
being the primary improvements. The popularity of this change is evidenced by increased usage. Before
the renovation, the library would fill to capacity for only a few hours per day, and then only during the
peak dates of midterms or finals, but the increased usage has now expanded to almost the entire quarter.
Shelving of periodicals and media has been converted to open, browseable stacks, with results as
discussed under circulation statistics below.
The library has first call on the use of a general purpose classroom on the first floor of the building,
reserving the right to displace other assigned classes whenever needed. The library’s needs dictated the
furnishing and equipping of the room. As a result, the library not only has a better place to teach
information skills, but the campus as a whole has access to an innovative alternative to the electronic
classroom layout.
The remodel includes a new lab that provides access to digital media technology for faculty, staff, and
particularly students, who have made productive use of the facilities and equipment for a variety of
academic projects and products. The new design has also made it possible to house some non-library
programs in the building, such as the Title-III funded Learning Center and the new TRIO Program. These
programs are a valuable asset to the students of the College, and they work closely with the library’s
instructional efforts, thus strengthening all three programs.
Maintenance of Library Resources: Data indicate a regular increase in materials expenditures during
recent years. Especially noteworthy is the allocation for the past two years of additional funds for targeted
collection development. For 2004-05, the library targeted General Reference and Literature, investing in
expensive sets whose purchase had been deferred; in 2005-06 the focus is on Psychology and Natural
Resources materials; in 2006-07 the library intends to concentrate on the Nursing monographic collection.
Closer work with discipline faculty has resulted in written collection development policies that ensure
proper selection of materials.
Library Usage: Recorded circulation of physical materials dropped 42% during the year of renovation
(2002-03); while there was a rebound after the completion of the renovation, circulation has not yet
recovered to pre-renovation levels. Except for uses of books, changes in policies seem to account for
these shifts more than actual changes in usage. Records of circulation for journals and recorded usage of
media reflect changes in the library’s floor plan, since both were previously closed stack and now both are
open for browsing by users. This has resulted in a decrease in recorded use of print journals, even though
actual use may have increased. Policy changes allowing students to borrow media materials have resulted
in a significant increase in recorded usage of those materials. Use of electronic journals continues to
increase at three to four percent annually and was not affected by building changes.
24
Recorded use of books shows the greatest decrease. This may be partly typical of a trend that is apparent
nationwide but can also be attributed to the age of the collection. As discussed above, the library is
making efforts to address this problem of currency of materials.
Information Services
The purpose of Information Services is to provide appropriate computing, networking infrastructure,
telecommunications and support services to faculty, students, and staff in order to facilitate both academic
and administrative computing.
Bandwidth requirements for both the main campus and the College’s Education Centers have increased
tremendously. The College currently has a 10Mb fiber connection to the K20 backbone and T1 lines
connecting the main campus to the four outreach centers, compared to a single 56Kb line to the main
campus and no communications to the Education Centers in 1996.
Since its inception in 1999, ITV (interactive television) capabilities have more than doubled. Resources
include capability for two concurrent sessions at the Ilwaco and Raymond Education Centers and three
sessions on the main campus. These capabilities on the main campus allow attendance at state-wide
administrative meetings without affecting the ability to offer two concurrent instructional sessions. Each
location has the capability to be either the initiating or receiving end.
Student access to computing facilities has improved with the addition of an open lab space that is never
used for classes and an increase in the number of open computers available in the library from 23 to 32. In
2006, current general computer specification is 2+GHz machines with 40GB hard drive, 1GB RAM and
17” LCD monitor, which is a significant improvement over the 2001 specifications (733MHz, 20GB hard
drive, 128MB RAM and 17” CRT monitor). The student technology fee has been beneficial in providing
the desired three-year replacement cycle for student lab machines.
New software has been installed since 2001 to support the Nursing program, Medical Technology, CIS,
Office Technology, GIS, Auto Shop, AutoCAD, as well as developmental reading and math. Replacement
servers were installed for GIS and the primary Novell authentication and print servers for both instruction
and administrative users. A server and software were added to support the Auto Shop program. High end
computers were added to the Media Center allowing video editing in addition to other image
manipulation software. A learning center was created with 12 general workstations and practice software
for Math and GED Preparation as well as writing center activities. Network data storage space has been
allocated for each student so files are available from any lab on campus.
As indicated during the last accreditation visit as well as in the College’s internal scan, additional
initiatives are difficult to support because of limited classified staffing. However, since the last visit,
Information Services has upgraded the College’s email from a UNIX based pop mail system to a full
featured Exchange2003 implementation running on a Windows2003 server. Though a formal helpdesk is
not in place, the recent installation of a web-based helpdesk system will provide this much needed service
to end users.
The number of workstations for students has increased dramatically from 250 on the main campus and 90
at the education centers in 2000 to 382 on the main campus and 125 at the education centers in 2005.
Total supported workstations is approximately 950 for all sites. In addition, there has been a 50%
increase in the number of printers and a three-fold increase in the number of servers supported without an
increase in the number or level of technical support staff. Staffing will remain a crucial area of concern if
Information Services is to continue to provide highly valued customer service and even more critical in
25
the ability to provide new initiatives such as wireless access for students, SQL database support for new
programs, an improved purchasing system, or support for requested document imaging installations.
STANDARD VI: GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION
While the governance system has not changed since the last full self-study and review process, there have
been several changes to the governing board and the leadership and management of the College. The
inclusive process of committee participation across the district has continued. The recent strategic
planning process has included participation from virtually the entire College community and many
members of the surrounding community.
Governance
Faculty, staff and students continue to be integral to the governance of the college through an inclusive
system of committee participation that develops and reviews policy and procedure in addition to planning
and implementing assigned responsibilities. All constituencies are represented at meetings of the Board of
Trustees and President’s Cabinet, while faculty and staff comprise the greatest representation on other
college committees. The list of committees is reviewed annually and revisions proposed to meet the
changing needs of the college. The attached list of committee changes since 2001 reflects those changing
needs over the past five years (see Appendix 14). In the past two years the College has established new
committees to select art for the new buildings, plan for the performing arts center events, plan the budget,
design college celebrations, undertake strategic planning, manage enrollment, and arrange for college
special speakers. All faculty and staff are invited to select the committees on which they wish to serve.
Appointments are made based on those selections.
Communication within the College community remains strong with regular meetings of administrative,
instructional, and student services committees. The strategic planning process initiated this year included
several meetings with the campus community to explain the process, timelines, and outcomes of this
activity, and comments were solicited on the College’s website. The President’s Cabinet is in the process
of reviewing College policies for recommendations to the Board for update and revision.
Governing Board
The five members of the Board of Trustees are appointed to five-year terms. In many cases they are
reappointed to an additional term of five years, but it is rare for a member of the board to serve more than
two terms. Currently on the Board are three members in their second terms, two of those reappointed in
the past year and one in his eighth year of service. The two other Board members were appointed to their
first term within the past two years. The Board includes representation of the public interest and the
diverse elements of the institution. This diversity includes the geographic areas of the district, labor and
management, gender, and ethnicity. Brief biographies of the Trustees appear in Appendix 15.
The Board is in the process of reviewing its policies to ensure their accuracy and applicability to the
mission of the College. Policy revision, if necessary, will be accomplished by December 2006.
Leadership and Management
Although the college has undergone several changes in executive leadership as retirements and
opportunities for advancement have occurred, there have been no changes in the inclusive processes
guiding the selection of executive management and other leadership positions.
26
In 2004, following the retirement of a President who had served the College for 15 years, the Board
oversaw a thorough screening and selection process involving the entire campus community, resulting in
the appointment of a new President. Since that time, the College has engaged in its longstanding practice
of inclusive screening and interviewing in order to hire a new Vice President for Administrative Services
and a new Executive Director for the Foundation/Director of Development. The College is in the process
of screening candidates to fill the recently vacated Vice President for Instruction’s position.
Changes to leadership and management since 2000 include the promotions of the Assistant Dean for
Human Resources and the Director of the Foundation/Development to the level of Chief. The
Foundation/Development position subsequently returned to Director status owing to a shift in
responsibilities. Some recent changes in the organizational structure include having the Chief for
Facilities and Operations report to the Vice President for Administrative Services, establishing an
Assistant Director of School/College Relations position, and adding administrative and staff positions for
the new Title III and TRIO programs (see Appendix 16a and 16b, Organizational Charts).
STANDARD VII: FINANCE
The past several years have been a period of relative stability for the College in terms of resource levels
and management. The financial statements for the past five years demonstrate that the college is
financially stable and has sufficient financial reserves (see Appendix 17). Consistent leadership within
Administrative Services from 1998 through mid-2005 resulted in improved internal controls and no recent
audit findings. The position of Chief Financial Officer was changed to Vice President of Administrative
Services in 2005, allowing for improved communications with others on the Executive Team.
Although the budgeting process has been stable over the last several years, following a multi-step process
to integrate the College’s Priority Goals and identified Improvement Objectives, the College’s recently
instituted strategic planning process addresses the need to tie planning to budget and resource allocation
as noted in the 2001 self-study. The process is an inclusive one, with all College programs identifying
strategies, assessment measures, and potential budget impacts.
Growth in grant funding continues for the College and includes a five-year Title III grant, beginning in
October 2004 and bringing in approximately $1.8 million (or roughly $365,000 per year) over five years;
a TRIO grant, also for five years beginning 2005, bringing in $220,000 per year for five years; and a
Lumina Grant in partnership with the Evergreen State College for reservation-based Native American
students.
The Grays Harbor College Foundation
Although the function of the Grays Harbor College Foundation has not appreciably changed since 2001,
the Foundation has recently employed a new Executive Director, who is a half-time employee of the
Foundation and a half-time employee of the College as the Director of Resource Development.
The Foundation has grown its assets from $2,532,428 in 2001 to $4,116,157 currently (see Exhibit 13).
The Foundation awards more than $250,000 in scholarships each year to support approximately 146
Grays Harbor College students, including several gender- and race-based scholarships previously handled
directly by the College. The Hispanic Student Scholarship program originated with a Foundation Board
member. The Foundation also plays a critical role in supporting capital projects for the College, including
the Riverview Educational Center in Raymond, the Ilwaco Education Center, and the new Instructional
Building on the main campus. The Foundation has also supported the college in recent years with
equipment purchases, including a piano for the electronic Music Lab and equipment for the Fitness Lab.
27
Recently the Foundation initiated its strategic planning process to take a closer look at its operations, plan
for the future, and reevaluate its mission and vision. While the major focus of the GHC Foundation
remains to provide student scholarships, the scope of purpose has started to expand recently. The
Foundation manages a book loan fund as well as the Umar Student Emergency Assistance Fund
developed by a faculty member, and recently began offering 25 $1,000 tool scholarships for workforce
education students. These changes and others have been driven by donors with specific interests, all in
support of the Foundation’s mission: “to increase opportunities for deserving students to realize their
educational goals by offering scholarship assistance and to provide strong support for the academic
environment of the College.”
STANDARD VIII – PHYSICAL FACILITIES
The College has been fortunate in being able to renovate and add facilities since the 2001 accreditation
visit. The driving force for facility improvements has been the GHC Facilities Master Plan, which will
guide appropriation requests for capital improvements through 2014. The plan is updated every five years,
as mandated by the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges. The most recent version was
completed and submitted to the SBCTC in December 2005. This has greatly assisted campus facility
planning efforts by providing a long-term, coherent plan for development over a multi-year period.
Whiteside Education Center Addition: This “Families that Work” addition was made to the Whiteside
Education Center in downtown Aberdeen in 2000-01 at a cost of $73,000. It provides an infant center
space for babies ages one to six months while the parents are receiving instruction toward the GED. The
Center also provides opportunities for instructors to observe parents and their parenting techniques as the
parents interact with their infants. The facility meets state child care regulations.
500 Building Remodel: Completed in 2002, this remodel included a fitness lab, locker rooms, weight
room and office areas; the cost was $300,000. With the increase in square footage, the remodel affords the
opportunity for many more students to participate in PE classes in a much more user-friendly space. The
building was transformed from an eyesore to a state-of-the-art facility. Over the past few years, the
College has increased and updated most of the equipment for student use in both the weight room and the
fitness lab.
300 Building Remodel: Major improvements were made to air quality of the building. The project
upgraded the heating system by placing individual “univents” in all classrooms and some of the offices.
Added mechanical building controls were installed. Most of the classrooms and a number of offices in the
building were updated. This project was completed in 2002 at a cost of $400,000.
Riverview Education Center Remodel: The Center in Raymond was remodeled to be able to offer on-site
and ITV courses to North Pacific County students. This project, completed in 2002 at a cost of $1.3
million, provides an opportunity for residents of North Pacific County to obtain an AA transfer degree in
their own community. In addition, residents can take courses that lead to applied science degrees and
various vocational certificates. Courses are also offered in Adult Basic Education, GED Preparation and
ESL. Community special interest classes provide enrichment and skill building for residents of the area.
Spellman Library Remodel: Formerly, the library was a three-story (five-level) building with limited
ADA access and insufficient electrical circuits, which created a variety of safety issues. The remodel
successfully addressed access issues, student needs and major safety concerns. The remodel was
completed in 2003 at a cost of $6 million.
28
Bishop Center for Performing Arts Addition: Completed in 2003, this addition increased the backstage
area, added a green room/rehearsal area, added a set building shop and storage areas, updated HVAC, and
remodeled the ladies’ restroom to increase the number of stalls. The remodel has provided much needed
work and storage space. It also allows for expanded use by the community for productions requiring
larger (deeper) stage areas. The Bishop Center addition was completed at a cost of $1.3 million.
Columbia Education Center Building: This project in Ilwaco will provide increased local access to the
AA transfer degree, applied science degrees, and various vocational certificates for students in South
Pacific County. It will be completed in summer 2006 at an anticipated cost of $1.4 million. Additional
courses are offered in adult basic education, GED preparation and ESL. Community special interest
classes provide enrichment and skill building to residents of the area.
Jewell C. Manspeaker Instructional Building: Currently more than halfway completed is a 70,000-squarefoot building on the main campus that will replace the 200, 400 and 600 buildings. It is scheduled for
completion in November 2006; anticipated cost is $20.7 million. The Jewell C. Manspeaker Instructional
Building replaces aging buildings and helps reshape the campus. This major addition to the GHC campus
provides a 21st century learning environment and becomes the focal point for a new vision of the college.
It will also update technology services in classrooms and offices.
STANDARD IX: INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY
Grays Harbor College continues to ensure high ethical standards in its treatment of students, faculty, and
staff through careful articulation of expectations in various publications, conscientious adherence to the
principles behind the expectations, and periodic review of the shared values that underlie those principles.
Policies and Agreements
Grays Harbor College’s Board of Trustees has adopted official policies on Ethical Standards and
Conflicts of Interest (see Board Policies 108 and 109 in Exhibit 5, the Board Policy Manual,GHC
Website). Additionally, the Board of Trustees has committed to the review and revision of all Board
Policies before the end of the 2006 calendar year. Operating Procedures will be revised as needed during
this process. The current procedure for adopting board policies remains the same as in the 2001 selfstudy.
The College fully supports the policy on academic freedom as outlined in the faculty’s CBA, in Board
Policy 205, and in the NWCCU Accreditation Handbook Standard Nine. There have been no faculty,
student or community complaints upheld with regard to violation of College members’ rights to academic
freedom.
Following a negotiation process involving interest-based bargaining, the Grays Harbor College Federation
of Teachers and the Board of Trustees have recently adopted a new five-year collective bargaining
agreement. The agreement was ratified last spring and runs from 2005-10. Beginning in July 2005, the
College entered into a collective bargaining agreement with the Washington Public Employees
Association which represents the GHC classified staff. This master contract was negotiated on a statewide
level for the 2005-06 academic year. Negotiations will begin soon on the master contract for next year.
The College works hard to ensure that all procedures set forth in both negotiated agreements are followed,
and engages in ongoing contract maintenance in order to minimize major issues in subsequent
renegotiations.
29
Informational Material for Students
After a thorough review of all published informational material by the College’s Marketing Committee,
the College identified a need to standardize the publication of such materials through one office. This has
resulted in the revision of our catalog, class schedules, viewbook and program brochures. Grays Harbor
College will use the same format, color scheme, and branding for all informational materials. This format
change is being phased in and will be complete by the end of the 2005-06 academic year.
One area of concern has been noted regarding materials provided to pre-nursing students. During an
October 2005 on site review, the National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission (NLNAC) noted
inaccuracies about curricular requirements in published documents including the Nursing Student
Handbook and the Nursing Program Information Packet. Nursing faculty has corrected the discrepancies
and put in place an annual monitoring process. Necessary corrections are included in the 2006-2008
College Catalog.
The College-wide focus in recent years on the Desired Student Abilities has increased cohesion among all
members of the College community; in particular, focus on the DSA of social and personal responsibility
has enhanced awareness of the need for ethics and integrity in a variety of areas ranging from students
and faculty working together to avoid even unintentional plagiarism and other types of academic
dishonesty, to all members of the College community demonstrating respect for those with whom they
work and learn.
Conclusion
Grays Harbor College has undergone significant change in the five years since its last self-study. The
College’s main campus and its Education Centers have experienced remarkable growth and enhancement
of facilities through capital projects. New staff, particularly at the upper levels of administration, have
brought with them fresh and innovative perspectives from which to go about the work of maintaining the
College’s many strengths and addressing its areas for improvement. An inclusive and holistic new
strategic planning process brings all members of the college community together to ensure the cohesion
of the institution’s priorities, goals, programs, outcomes, and budgeting decisions. Perhaps most
important, the College has achieved its desired focus on assessment of student outcomes through the
application, assessment, analysis and revision of the Desired Student Abilities, not only across the
instructional divisions but across the entire college experience.
Appendix 1
AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04
Goal # 1 – Continue to improve instructional programs as well as student services and other support services.
Strengths:
Student satisfaction with programs and services is high – 84% are satisfied with the quality of instruction; 90% would recommend GHC to a friend or
family member; 84% rate their entire educational experience excellent or good.
Faculty, staff and community members are satisfied with programs and services – Over 90% of those surveyed agree/strongly agree that GHC’s
transfer courses, ABE/ESL courses, Dev Ed courses, occupational programs and student services are of high quality; 89% believe GHC offers a
comprehensive set of programs and services.
Financial Aid is available to students – 72% of all applicants receive financial aid and the amount awarded in both need-based and non-need based
categories increased between 2000-01 and 2001-02.
Distance Education provides increased student access - Between 2000-01 and 2001-02 the number of distance ed courses offered increased by 25%
and the number of students enrolled increased by 62%.
Weaknesses:
Enrollment of district high school graduates is declining – High school capture rate has declined from 25% in 2000 to 19% in 2002.
Evaluation of library services is not included in current assessment activities.
Improvement Objective 1.1 –
Increase to 23% by Fall 2004 the proportion of recent high school
graduates enrolling at GHC.
Improvement Objective 1.2 –
By Winter 2004, administer a system-wide student survey developed
by the Library & Media Directors Council to assess the effectiveness
of library services.
1
Grays Harbor College
Aberdeen, WA
Appendix 1
AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04
Goal #2 –
Insure a student-centered campus that nurtures success.
Strengths:
Students believe GHC is student centered and supports student success – 69% of students surveyed felt that GHC provided significant support for
student success, with another 27% experiencing some support.; 49% agreed that GHC provided significant financial support, another 27% said GHC
provided some support.
Faculty, staff and community members believe GHC is student centered and supports student success – 94% agree/strongly agree that GHC
encourages student success; 94% agree that GHC is a learner-centered college.
Students utilize programs that support student success – 883 students used tutoring services; 506 sessions were provided by entry advisors.
Students successfully complete enrolled courses - 75% of students successfully complete core courses in developmental and college-level math and
English; the % of ABE students achieving subject level gain increased from 28% in 98-99 to 45% in 2001.
Degree seeking students achieve educational goals – Between 2000-01 and 2001-02 the % of students achieving substantial progress (graduates or
enrolled 4 qtrs. within a 2-yr. period).increased from 54% to 68% for full-time students and from 19% to 30% for part-time students.
Weaknesses:
Lack of social support - only 28% of students agreed that GHC provides significant support to help students thrive socially while 29% said that this
occurs very little.
Low number of degrees awarded – GHC awards the lowest number of academic associate degrees compared to peer colleges; GHC awards the
second lowest number of vocational degrees and certificates compared to peer colleges.
Improvement Objective 2.1 Increase the number of students (duplicated) served through tutoring from 883 to 1000 in 2003-04.
Improvement Objective 2.2 –
Increase completion rates in developmental English classes from 69% to 72% in Winter Quarter 2004.
Improvement Objective 2.3 –
By June 30, 2005, at least 5% of the students entering GHC in Fall 20032will have received a degree or certificate from theGrays
college.
Harbor College
Aberdeen, WA
Appendix 1
AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04
Goal # 3 – Promote the continuation of the warm, respectful, collaborative learning and working environment of Grays
Harbor College.
Strengths:
Faculty, staff and community members believe GHC provides a warm, respectful, collaborative learning and working environment - 81%
agree/strongly agree with this statement; 90% agree that GHC is served by excellent faculty, staff, and administrators.
Students believe that GHC fosters a warm, respectful, collaborative learning and working environment - 97% of all students view GHC as a
comfortable environment, free of harassment; 59% believe GHC has significantly improved their ability to work effectively with others, another 33%
agree that GHC has helped some.
Achievements of faculty, staff, and students are recognized - Numerous opportunities exist for all classes of employees to be honored for their
contributions to GHC; students are recognized through awards and recognition ceremonies, campus publications, and presentations by the Board of
Trustees.
Improvement Objective 3.1 –
During 2003-04, increase by twelve the number of faculty
and staff who have completed mediation training.
Grays Harbor College
Aberdeen, WA
Appendix 1
AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04
Goal # 4 – Continually evaluate and respond to the educational needs of the communities we serve.
Strengths:
Strong relationships with the community – 88% of faculty, staff and community members surveyed agree/strongly agree that GHC is responsive to
changing needs; 77% agree that GHC has strong, effective partnerships with schools, colleges, state and local agencies. Examples of partnerships
include high school programs such as Running Start, Tech Prep and World Class Scholars; Job Readiness and workforce education programs in
cooperation with Work Source Grays Harbor; and distance education programs and upside-down articulation agreements with four-year schools for
students who want to pursue a bachelor’s degree.
Students obtain employment after training – 56% of students responded that GHC helped them to acquire work-related knowledge and skills very
much/quite a bit, another 27% said GHC helped some; 81% of completers and 68% of early leavers are employed 9 months after leaving college.
GHC responds to the interests of local businesses and industries – Under the umbrella of the Pacific Mountain Workforce Development Council,
GHC has developed programs with industry partners such as Boise Cascade to provide a trained local workforce for their new facility; GHC has been
responsive to labor market shortages, providing increased training opportunities and securing grant funding for development of a regional response to
the current health care worker shortage and partnering with others in a Co-Teach grant designed to provide teacher education to meet the shortage in
the teaching profession. GHC has also provided customized training to meet the needs of specific employers.
Advisory Committees provide valuable input – fully staffed advisory committees for all of the college’s professional-technical programs keep
training current, relevant and responsive to changing needs.
Improvement Objective 4.1 –
Complete an educational needs assessment for South
Pacific County by December 31, 2003.
Grays Harbor College
Aberdeen, WA
Appendix 1
AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04
Goal # 5 – Continue to upgrade instructional programs and student and support services through the application of
appropriate technologies.
Strengths:
Students are satisfied that they have access to computers and other technologies – 60% believe GHC provides ample places on campus to use
computers and technology, compared to 48% of all community college students in Washington state; 72% identified the GHC campus as their access
point for computer use; 57% agreed/strongly agreed that GHC has helped them to use computing and information technology, another 26% agreed
that GHC had helped some; 79% of students said that they were very or somewhat satisfied with the computer labs.
Faculty and staff are satisfied that they have access to computers and other technologies – 90% of all employees agree that GHC supports computers
and information services; operating budget allocations are sufficient to support computer and related technology needs; a replacement cycle for all
technology needs has been established and is adhered to; planning and decision making related to technology needs are fully integrated into the
budget development process.
New technologies are readily available – GHC continues to upgrade its instructional and student support service technologies to provide students,
faculty and staff with information and tools that make teaching and learning easier and more successful. The Technology Fee, established by
students in 1998, has resulted in over $360,000 of additional revenue to support these efforts.
Improvement Objective 5.1 –
Appropriately equip the new computer labs and learning
center in the newly renovated library by September 15, 2003.
Grays Harbor College
Aberdeen, WA
Appendix 1
AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04
Goal # 6 – Promote the health, welfare and equal treatment of all students, faculty and staff.
Strengths:
Students perceive that the college treats them fairly and promotes their health and welfare – 81% of GHC students believe that they have always been
treated equally; 31% of students have often/very often engaged in a regular exercise program on campus (compared to a state average of 14%); 35%
felt that they had gained or made progress related to developing good health habits.
Faculty and staff perceive that the college treats them fairly and promotes their health and welfare – 84% of faculty and staff agree/strongly agree that
GHC fosters ethical behavior; workshops, contests, and presentations sponsored by the Health & Wellness Committee and the Safety Committee are
well attended and promote the health, safety and welfare of all GHC students and staff.
Established policies and procedures assure fairness - Published and readily available documents set standards and guidelines for the equal and fair
treatment of all students, faculty and staff.
GHC supports the health and welfare of faculty, staff and students - Nearly 1600 students received academic, personal or career counseling in 200102; Employee Advisory Service provides referral for employees needing counseling for personal or work-related issues; instructional offerings
include courses in personal development, wellness, and career and life planning; on-campus Day Care is provided to approximately 100 children
quarterly - 62% are children of students and staff; nearly 12% of GHC students self-identify as having a disability - 45% of those students receive
services from the Disability Support Services office; ASGHC provides numerous activities to promote health, wellness and equal treatment ranging
from speakers and retreats to musical performances and ethnic celebrations.
Professional development is encouraged and supported - All employee groups have resources devoted to and opportunities provided for professional
development. A large proportion of employees participate in some such activity including academic credit courses, conferences, workshops, tuition
waivers, and sabbatical leave.
Weaknesses:
Students perceive that the college does not emphasize ethical behaviors - Only 30% of students surveyed agreed that the college helped them very
much/quite a bit to develop a personal code of values and ethics compared to 37% of students in the national sample; 28% said that the college did
very little to help them.
Improvement Objective 6.1 –
6
In the spring of 2005, at least, 35% of GHC’s students will report that their
experiences at the college
contributed “very much or quite a lot” to their skills and abilities in developing a personal code of values and
ethics. This represents a 5% improvement from a baseline of 30% in 2002.
Grays Harbor College
Aberdeen, WA
Appendix 1
AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04
Goal # 7 – Recognize and enhance the strengths inherent in the diversity within our college, community and nation.
Strengths:
Faculty and staff perceive that the college promotes diversity – 89% of faculty and staff believe that the college promotes diversity.
Student population reflects ethnic diversity – GHC student population is more ethnically diverse than the community it serves. All minority groups
are more represented in the student population, reflecting GHC’s commitment to ESL/ABE educational opportunities for these residents.
Academic curriculum emphasizes cultural diversity - 56 courses in the academic curriculum include a cultural diversity component.
Students, faculty and staff have opportunities to participate in multicultural activities – The GHC Multicultural Committee, the Associated Students
of GHC, and the Bishop Center for Performing Arts, all supported by college resources, provide numerous opportunities for students, faculty, staff
and the community to experience cultural and ethnic diversity through educational and entertainment avenues.
Weaknesses:
Students do not perceive that the college promotes diversity –
ƒ Only 35% of students agreed that the college encourages contact among students from different backgrounds very much/quite a bit, nearly ¼
felt that the college made very little effort to do this.
ƒ Only 34% said that GHC had helped them to understand people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds, more than 1/3 said that the college
had done this very little.
ƒ Only 36% had had serious conversations with students of different races often/very often while 27% said that they never did this.
ƒ Only 42% had had serious conversations with students of different religious, political or personal beliefs often/very often while 23% said that
they had never done this.
Employee population does not reflect ethnic diversity - GHC employees are not as diverse as the surrounding community. Minority employees
are under represented.
Improvement Objective 7.1 –
During 2003-04, the college will increase by, at least, one FTE the number of people of color working at GHC.
Improvement Objective 7.2 –
By the spring of 2005, 45% of GHC’s students will report that the college encourages contact among students from
different backgrounds very much or quite a lot – a 10% improvement over
a baseline of 35% in 2002.
7
Grays Harbor College
Aberdeen, WA
Appendix 1
AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04
Goal # 8 – Manage the resources of the college efficiently and effectively and diversify the sources of revenue appropriately
to achieve the mission and priorities of the college.
Strengths:
Faculty, staff and community members perceive that the college manages its resources well – 73% of those surveyed agree/strongly agree with this
statement.
Staffing ratios compare favorably with peer colleges – When compared to the four community colleges closest in size, GHC had the 2nd lowest FTE
and student headcount. Staffing levels correlated closely with this – overall, GHC’s staffing level was the lowest among its peers, representing
efficiency of resources.
The college actively seeks to diversify its revenue sources – The GHC Foundation contributes over $200,000 annually to support student
scholarships, college initiatives and capital projects; federal, state, private industry and education partner grants exceeded 2.2 million in 2001-02;
GHC students contribute approximately $85,000 annually through a Technology Fee to support technology improvements; student activity fees of
approximately $200,000 annually support student government, athletics, and a variety of student clubs.
State laws and regulations governing the college’s resources are strictly followed - State audits of the college’s resources demonstrate compliance;
findings and suggestions for improvement are immediately addressed.
Budget development is inclusive and involves all constituencies – A comprehensive budget development process tied to the mission and goals of the
college includes students, faculty, and staff.
The college has an operational Facilities Master Plan - Developed by community members, staff, students, faculty and outside consultants, the
Facilities Master Plan provides short, medium and long range plans for replacement and renovation of the college’s facilities. With its vision clearly
articulated, the college has been able to acquire capital funding and ambitious first steps are currently underway.
Operating budget expenditures and revenues are in balance – All general fund balances are closely monitored and adequate fund balances
maintained.
Improvement Objective 8.1 –
By December 31, 2004, the design phase for the new classroom building will
be completed, so that construction could begin as early as July 2005.
Grays Harbor College
Aberdeen, WA
Appendix 1
AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04
Goal #9 – Effectively market and promote GHC programs and the services it provides.
Strengths:
Faculty, staff and community members believe that GHC effectively markets its programs and services - 73% agree/strongly agree with this
statement.
GHC uses a variety of media to promote its programs and services – All 50,000 homes in the service district receive the quarterly schedule; other
publications include the GHC General Catalog, the GHC Viewbook, and Professional/Technical Degree Brochures. In addition, newspaper, radio,
television, movie theatre ads, the World Wide Web, presentations, student ambassadors and high school guidance counselor exchanges are used to
promote the college. Marketing strategies have been developed to address the diversity in age and educational needs within the district and resources
devoted to marketing have been increased 46% over the last two years.
The college serves the community beyond its academic mission - In addition to its academic mission, the college is an integral part of the community
socially and culturally and widely promotes those opportunities for district residents. The Bishop Center for Performing Arts mails over 3300 season
brochures to its patrons as well as promoting its events in the newspaper, on radio and on the GHC website; as a member of NWAACC, GHC teams
compete in seven different sports for both men and women – such events are co-sponsored by local banks and supported by the community-based
Choker Club; GHC student clubs actively support local charities including food and clothing banks, toy drives, and cancer fundraising events; college
facilities are used to host a wide variety of community events including health promotions, job fairs, knowledge bowl competition, military
recruitment, information booths and ethnic celebrations.
Improvement Objective 9.1 –
By Spring 2004, develop a compact disc for distribution to prospective
students that provides information comparable to that contained in
the hard copy “Viewbook.”
Grays Harbor College
Aberdeen, WA
Appendix 1
AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04
Goal # 10 – Continue to provide high quality and culturally enriching arts exhibitions, activities, presentations and
performances.
Strengths:
Faculty, staff and community members perceive that the college provides high quality arts exhibitions, activities, presentations and performances 92% of those surveyed agreed/strongly agreed with this statement; the Bishop Center continues to receive funding from public grants, foundations,
corporate sponsors and private donors in support of its high quality programming.
Attendance at events continues to grow - Attendance at Bishop Center events has increased 50% from 5214 in 1996-97 to 7823 in 2001-02. In
keeping with its mission statement to “make programming for children and families a high priority” the Bishop Center has coordinated with local
school districts to provide daytime performances for students at reduced prices. Nearly 2000 students attended these performances in 2001-02.
The college provides a variety of performances, arts exhibits, and presentations annually – Through the Bishop Center for Performing Arts, the John
Spellman Library Art Gallery, the GHC Athletic Department, and the Associated Student of Grays Harbor College, the college provides area
residents with a rich variety of educational, athletic and cultural events from which to choose. In addition to encouraging appreciation of the arts,
many performances include workshops that allow residents to gain skills in performance. Though GHC is located in a rural community that is both
economically depressed and limited in diversity, its efforts provide residents with the opportunity to gain a deeper appreciation of the arts and a
deeper understanding of cultural diversity. In doing so, GHC lives up to its mission to “improve lives through education.”
Improvement Objective 10.1 –
•
By Fall 2003, reopen the newly renovated Bishop Center with a gala event and a culturally enriching schedule of productions
for 2003-04.
Improvement Objective 10.2 –
•
Throughout the 2003-04 school year, sponsor culturally enriching art exhibits in the new art gallery within the newly
renovated Spellman Library.
Improvement Objective 10.3 –
•
By Spring 2004, dedicate a new and appropriate work of art to the many former employees who committed their professional
lives to making GHC an effective college committed to student learning.
Grays Harbor College
Aberdeen, WA
Appendix 2
Grays Harbor College Priority Goals and Institutional Effectiveness
An Improvement Plan for 2004-05
$200,000 of one-time local funds has been incorporated into the operating budget for 2004-05. $100,000 of these funds has been allocated for specific
improvement objectives highlighted below. The other $100,000 has been set aside for future initiatives and strategic planning.
1 Access – Provide equal opportunities and equal access to quality education for life-long learning.
Objectives for 2004 – 05
ƒ
By Winter 2006, complete a plan for expansion of programs and services at Ilwaco Education Center, based on completed Needs Assessment,
which will improve Pacific County service levels.
ƒ
During 2004-05, improve access at off campus locations that are currently under-served. Suggestions included investigating alternative course
delivery at SCCC, for example, correspondence courses; offering on-site or ITV classes at Taholah based on an informal needs assessment of
residents.
ƒ
During 2004-05, increase the number of scholarship applications received and funds awarded.
2 Improvement – Continue to improve instructional programs as well as student services and other support services
Objectives for 2004 – 05
ƒ
*By Fall 2004, increase to 23% the proportion of recent high school graduates enrolling at GHC.
ƒ
*By Spring 2004, administer a student survey developed by the Library & Media Directors Council to assess the effectiveness of library
services.
ƒ
During Fall 2004, host a successful visit by the Commission on Colleges that results in a finding of full compliance with the Commission’s
previous recommendations regarding educational assessment.
ƒ
Improve overall DSA rating for Social & Personal Responsibility (2.38). Suggestions included identifying all courses in the quarterly schedule
that have a diversity component; asking faculty to review Social & Personal Responsibility DSA to specifically identify diversity component.
ƒ
Improve overall DSA rating for Information Use (2.25) by providing faculty professional development activities. Suggestions included
sending a core group of faculty to training available through Library & Media Directors Council; providing a guest speaker from a 4-yr. school
to share the expectations they have of our transfer students related to information competency.
ƒ
Provide increased faculty and staff development opportunities. Suggestions included “teacher training” for all new faculty; ITV training for
instructors teaching on-line, development of skills in the use of media technology, courses in conversational Spanish.
ƒ
Conduct regular and systematic program review/evaluations to assess performance. Currently, three vocational programs and two areas of
student services complete in-depth reviews annually.
o Funded $4,500 to conduct program review for Business Office and Purchasing
o Funded $50,000 to Instruction for various projects to be determined by the V.P. for Instruction, with assistance from the Division
Chairs. Itemized projects that are funded will be linked to Improvement Objectives.
3 Student Success – Insure a student-centered campus which nurtures success.
Objectives for 2004 – 05
ƒ
*In 2003 – 04, increase the number of students served through tutoring from 883 to 1000.
ƒ
*In Winter 2004, increase completion rates in developmental English classes from 69% to 72%.
ƒ
Establish a Fall 2004 cohort of degree-seeking students as a baseline measure for successful degree completion.
ƒ
Increase use of available student support services such as tutoring services, the Writing Desk, and participation in the Early Intervention
process.
ƒ
In Fall 2004, complete application for a TRIO Grant designed to support first-generation, low-income students.
o Funded $2,000 to support the TRIO grant development and review.
ƒ
During 2004-05, improve the rate of student progression from ABE to developmental/college level courses. Suggestions included piloting a
Transition Class designed to prepare students for success, increasing ABE student contact with counselors and other departments on the main
campus.
o Funded $22,500 to develop a tracking system to support the retention and progression of students.
4 Collaboration, Health & Welfare – Promote the health, welfare and equal treatment of all students, faculty, and staff by providing a
respectful, collaborative learning and working environment.
Objectives for 2004 – 05
ƒ
*During 2003 – 04, increase by 12 the number of faculty and staff who have completed mediation training.
ƒ
*In Spring 2005, at least 35% of GHC’s students will report that their experiences at the college contributed “very much or quite a lot” to their
skills and abilities in developing a personal code of values and ethics. This will represent a 5% improvement from a baseline of 30% in 2002.
o Funded $4,500 to administer the CCSSE in order to measure progress toward this goal.
ƒ
During 2004-05, provide enhanced tools, techniques, and training designed to promote a quality working environment for all staff.
o Funded $5,000 to hire a team building consultant for Nursing.
o Funded $2,000 for Student Services divisional team building and training.
*Carry-over objectives from 2003-04 Improvement Plan
5 Community –
Continually evaluate and respond to the educational needs of the community we serve.
Objectives for 2004 – 05
ƒ
During 2004-05, conduct a community and employer needs assessment to serve as the framework for a strategic plan that will allow GHC to
continue to be responsive to the needs of the community.
6 Technology –
Continue to upgrade instructional programs and student and support services through the application of appropriate
technologies.
Objectives for 2004 – 05
ƒ
Improve service and efficiency for students by increasing use of on-line student services. Suggestions included increasing the # of students
using web registration; linking the Schedule Planner tool with the Online Orientation module.
ƒ
Explore enhanced use of technology to improve programs and services, for example, wireless technology and document imaging.
o Funded $2,500 to improve the performance quality at the Bishop Center with upgrades to the sound system.
7 Diversity –
Recognize and enhance the strengths inherent in the diversity within our college, community, and nation.
Objectives for 2004 – 05
ƒ
*By Spring 2005, 45% of GHC’s students will report that the college encourages contact among students from different backgrounds “very
much or quite a lot” – a 10% improvement over a baseline of 35% in 2002.
o Funded $4,500 to administer the CCSSE in order to measure progress toward this goal.
ƒ
Beginning Fall 2004, host a quarterly campus-wide event to foster awareness of diversity issues.
o Funded $2,000 for Diversity Committee activities.
ƒ
During 2004-05, the college will continue to develop recruitment strategies designed to increase the number of qualified applicants of color.
8 Resources –
Manage the resources of the college efficiently and effectively and diversify the sources of revenue appropriately to achieve
the mission and priorities of the college.
Objectives for 2004 – 05
ƒ
*By December 31, 2004, the design phase for the new classroom building will be completed so that construction could begin as early as July
2005.
*Carry-over objectives from 2003-04 Improvement Plan
9
ƒ
In 2004-05, acquire state funding for Replacement Building One and Replacement Building Two as outlined in the Facilities Master Plan.
ƒ
In 2004-05, acquire state funds for the next phase of major capital projects.y June 2005, raise $350,000 in private matching funds to support
construction of the Ilwaco Education Center.
Marketing –
Effectively market and promote GHC programs and the services provided.
Objectives for 2004 – 05
ƒ
*By Spring 2004, develop a compact disc version of the GHC catalog for distribution to prospective students.
ƒ
Build on “word-of-mouth” marketing strategy by using the GHC website to feature quotes from current students and alumni, with links to
related program information.
o Funded $5,000 for marketing efforts.
10 Cultural Enhancement – Continue to provide high quality and culturally enriching art exhibitions, activities, presentations, and
performances.
Objectives for 2004 – 05
ƒ
*By Spring 2004, dedicate a new and appropriate work of art to the many former employees who committed their professional lives to making
GHC an effective college committed to student learning.
ƒ
During 2004-05, increase support for the Bishop Center for Performing Arts by obtaining at least 3 arts grants and increasing private donations
by at least 10%.
ƒ
During Summer 2004, expand programming and performance opportunities at the Bishop Center for Performing Arts by offering a summer
production of “Les Miserable” performed by local high school students.
*Carry-over objectives from 2003-04 Improvement Plan
Appendix 3
Grays Harbor College Priority Goals and Institutional Effectiveness
An Improvement Plan for 2005-06
1 Access – Provide equal opportunities and equal access to quality education for life-long learning.
Objectives for 2005-06
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
In January 2006, expand programs and services at the new Ilwaco Education Center resulting in an increase of 15 FTE.
Expand programming in Pacific County by implementing an Entrepreneurship program based on NxLevel training. The program will
begin in Ilwaco in September 2005 and in Raymond by January 2006.
Beginning July 2005, GHC will offer an online transfer associate degree in Corrections that will interface with WSU’s bachelors degree in
Criminal Justice.
Increase opportunities for bachelor’s degree attainment by offering a “major ready” transfer associate degree that will interface with
TESC’s Native American Studies program. Beginning in Fall 2005, the program will use online and seminar formats to serve the Quinault,
Skokomish, S’Klallam, Nisqually, Muckleshoot, and Makah tribes.
In 2005-06, implement College in the High School in the Elma School District.
2 Improvement – Continue to improve instructional programs as well as student services and other support services
Objectives for 2005-06
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Using the results of the CCSSE and internal assessment activities, continue to provide support and resources to improve educational
outcomes for students.
During 2005-06, develop new programs based on needs identified through the strategic planning process and available resources.
During spring quarter 2006, administer student and faculty surveys to assess the effectiveness of Library and Media services.
During 2005-06, transfer programs will be updated following the guidelines of ICRC.
By January 2006, GHC’s strategic plan will be completed and implementation will begin.
Provide increased outreach to area high schools through on-site testing/advising and more collaborative relationships with high school
personnel including a possible joint in-service for high school/college instructors.
Improve course alignment between high school and college curriculum.
During spring 2006, GHC will undergo its five year accreditation visit by the Commission on Colleges and will successfully meet all
requirements.
Pilot immersion techniques for information competency in linked course and develop measures of student attainment of information
competency.
3 Student Success – Insure a student-centered campus which nurtures success.
Objectives for 2005-06
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
¾
¾
¾
ƒ
In winter 2005, increase completion rates in developmental Math classes by 5%.
Implement TRIO grant objectives in support of first-generation, low income students.
Implement Title III objectives:
Increase the number of students receiving tutoring and writing desk services by 15%, from 1094 in 2004-05 to 1258 in 2005-06.
During 2005-06, 100% of tutors will complete a tutor training program compared to 10% of tutors in 2003-04.
During fall 2006, implement a pilot support program for students enrolled in ENGL 60 and ENGL 095 (might be changed to Reading)
that will result in a 25% higher success rate compared to students not participating in the pilot.
In 2005-06, the Counseling Center will implement a new intervention program, “Pathways to Success.”
4 Collaboration, Health & Welfare – Promote the health, welfare and equal treatment of all students, faculty, and staff by providing a
respectful, collaborative learning and working environment.
Objectives for 2005-06
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Successfully implement the new civil service system for classified staff beginning July 1, 2005.
During 2005-06, continue to provide training for employees on human resource topics including sexual harassment, workplace violence,
etc.
During 2005-06, the Human Resources department will implement a comprehensive orientation for new employees.
During summer 2005, three faculty members will attend the Kellogg Institute, a highly regarded program which focuses on teaching
strategies that lead to increased student success.
During 2005-06, celebrate the 75th anniversary of Grays Harbor College.
Explore possible options for improving winter safety on pathways, etc.
Purchase/install new exercise equipment in the fitness lab and develop strategies to increase the number of students using the fitness
facility.
Purchase Automatic External Defibrillators for Whiteside, Ilwaco, and Riverside Education Centers.
5 Community – Continually evaluate and respond to the educational needs of the community we serve.
Objectives for 2005-06
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Expand course offerings for employees of Westport Shipyard by offering marine electrical courses and expanding yacht finish carpentry
courses from three to six.
During 2005-06, the Natural Resources program will undergo program revision designed to better address market needs.
Collaborate with area business and industry to develop more contract courses and customized training for soft skills.
Continue to be an active partner in Light2 and determine ways to link the work of this organization with the objectives of the college.
6 Technology – Continue to upgrade instructional programs and student and support services through the application of appropriate
technologies.
Objectives for 2005-06
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
During 2005-06, develop a college-wide technology plan as part of the college’s strategic planning process.
During 2005-06, successfully re-host GHC’s data information systems to a new windows-based platform being implemented across the
system.
During 2005-06, implement new copy/printer policies, based on the recommendations of an internal committee and an outside consultant
that will provide centralized technology to reduce costs while also considering individual and division needs.
Improve technology at off-campus sites by having the same high-quality, compatible ITV equipment in two rooms for each off-campus
site.
During 2005-06, identify classroom technology needs that will be included in the new instructional building.
Meet instructional needs for computers and technology in classrooms providing specialized instruction, i.e., CD burning capability in at
least one computer classroom.
7 Diversity – Recognize and enhance the strengths inherent in the diversity within our college, community, and nation.
Objectives for 2005-06
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Utilize Title III and TRIO grant programs to improve outreach to underserved populations.
During 2005-06, the college will continue to develop recruitment strategies designed to diversify the college’s employee mix.
Expand the number and type of publications used to advertise job openings to reach a wider applicant pool.
Provide in-service training on Affirmative Action/I-200.
8 Resources – Manage the resources of the college efficiently and effectively and diversify the sources of revenue appropriately to achieve the
mission and priorities of the college.
Objectives for 2005-06
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
During 2005-06, request funding from the GHC Foundation beyond scholarship support.
Increase FTE production to meet new increased allocation of 14.
Initiate collaborative grant development with K-12, higher ed partners, and other organizations
During 2005-06, continue work on currently funded capital projects including the Ilwaco Education Center and the Manspeaker
Instructional Building.
In 2005-06, begin the design phase for the new Vocational Building.
In December 2005, request capital project funding for the 2007-09 biennium.
By summer 2005, complete and begin implementation of the revised facilities master plan.
Create a parking task force to evaluate anticipated parking issues that will arise as the facilities master plan is implemented.
9 Marketing – Effectively market and promote GHC programs and the services provided.
Objectives for 2005-06
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Develop formal marketing plan for 2005-06 academic year.
Increase the proportion of recent high school graduates enrolling in Fall 2005 from 23% to 25%.
Determine the reasons for enrollment fluctuations and develop strategies for improvement.
In 2005-06, hire a marketing firm through an RFP process to assist in the evaluation and development of a college-wide marketing plan.
10 Cultural Enhancement –Continue to provide high quality and culturally enriching art exhibitions, activities, presentations, and
performances.
Objectives for 2005-06
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Increase funding support for the Bishop Center for Performing Arts.
Develop a plan to secure funding for a summer production designed to provide performance opportunities for area youth.
Provide resources, managed by the Cultural Events Committee, to sponsor 2 lectures per quarter on campus i.e., political figures, faculty
from GHC or other colleges, outside lecturers.
Appendix 4 Strategic Planning Committee Membership
Strategic Planning Committee Membership
Faculty
Chris Aiken
Diane Carter
Darby Cavin
Diane Hanson
Mohammad Ibrahim
Tom Kuester
Laurie Laughery
Rod McDonald
Darrelyn Miller
Chris Portmann
Dan Pratt
Brenda Rolfe Maloney
Staff
Jackie Blumberg
Nancy Davis
Donna Fowler
Gloria Hibbs
Randy Karnath
Rebecca Spacek
Admin
Ed Brewster(chair)
Marcee Britton
Keith Foster
Nancy DeVerse
Dave Halverstadt
Stan Horton
Mike Kelly
Leon Lead
Sandy Lloyd
Mark Reisman
Debbie Reynvaan
Diane Smith
Gary Thomasson
Arlene Torgerson
Beate Wahl
Barbara Wood
Penny Woodruff
Choul Wou
Laurie Clary
Appendix 5 – Vision, Mission and Values
Grays Harbor College
Vision, Mission and Values
Adopted February 2006
VISION
Grays Harbor College is committed to
being the premier choice for excellence in
education, training, and services,
responsive to the diverse needs of our
communities.
MISSION
Grays Harbor College is a student-centered
institution that inspires academic achievement,
prepares an excellent workforce, and fosters
personal growth by providing outstanding
educational and cultural opportunities for
improving lives in a global community.
VALUES
Accessibility
Community
Diversity
Excellence
Integrity
Learning
Respect
Success
Leadership
Appendix 6 & 7 – Strategic Directions and Goals
Grays Harbor College
Strategic Directions and Goals
Adopted February 2006
Strategic Direction 1: Instruction
Evaluate program offerings, scheduling, and resources across the district in order to formulate a
comprehensive plan to meet the needs of our students and communities while promoting educational
excellence in teaching and learning in accordance with the Desired Student Abilities.
Goal 1.1: Develop and implement a system to evaluate all instructional programs to identify
community needs for new programs, growth, continued status, or possible elimination.
Goal 1.2: Create a class schedule that is more flexible and provides options for the diverse
community of students in our district.
Goal 1.3: Expand faculty professional development opportunities that enhance teaching and
learning.
Goal 1.4: Explore and implement ways to improve articulation with K-12 and 4-year colleges.
Goal 1.5: Support innovation and excellence in programming in alignment with the Desired
Student Abilities.
Strategic Direction 2: College Climate and Staffing
Evaluate and enhance college climate by providing effective leadership and promoting productive and
satisfying relationships among constituencies.
Goal 2.1: Support professional development for all constituencies, including team training and
leadership development.
Goal 2.2: Develop and implement a plan for staffing based on need, as made evident through data
and information.
Goal 2.3: Increase communication and collaboration among constituent groups to provide an
environment in which all people feel respected and valued.
Goal 2.4: Increase coordination between internal departments.
Goal 2.5: Enhance appreciation for the richness of diversity through hiring, student outreach,
professional development opportunities, and workshops.
Strategic Direction 3: Communications & Outreach
Develop and implement a comprehensive (internal and external) communications and outreach plan to
increase student and community access and enrollments, and to communicate a positive image of the
college to the communities it serves.
Goal 3.1: Design and implement systems that increase awareness, outreach and collaboration
with K-12 constituents including district boards, administration, staff and students.
Goal 3.2: Continue to foster opportunities for cultural growth and awareness among students,
staff and the community.
Appendix 6 & 7 – Strategic Directions and Goals
Goal 3.3: Develop systems to build and strengthen communication and partnerships with the
larger community including nonprofit organizations, labor, industry, government agencies,
colleges and universities, and community and service groups.
Goal 3.4: Assess and improve communication systems for engaging staff, students, and
community, contributing to the promotion of a positive image of GHC.
Goal 3.5: Design and implement systems that identify and enhance communication with
underserved and untapped populations.
Strategic Direction 4: Resources and Budget
Align budget, resource allocation, operations, and decision-making with the Strategic Plan and the
mission of the college.
Goal 4.1: Create an environment that ensures participation and communication regarding the
budget process.
Goal 4.2: Explore, identify and implement options for alternative resources to support the college
and its mission.
Goal 4.3: Explore, refine, and develop a plan to increase scholarship opportunities.
Strategic Direction 5: Student Services
Develop and implement a plan for the enhancement of student services and programs to support success
for current and prospective students.
Goal 5.1: Develop and implement a student centered plan to improve advising and entry services
for all students, including students at outreach campuses and distance education students.
Goal 5.2: Develop support systems for non-traditional student groups (ie, middle-aged and
seniors, Hispanic population and other underserved groups).
Goal 5.3: Provide more opportunities to enhance student learning experiences and social
development through student activities outside of the classroom.
Strategic Direction 6: Technology/Equipment/Facilities
Develop and communicate a comprehensive, college-wide vision for the integration of technology,
equipment and facilities including appropriate training for all staff.
Goal 6.1: Develop and implement a process for assessing instructional and administrative
technology needs.
Goal 6.2: Develop and implement a comprehensive and college wide plan for technology
purchases, updates and maintenance, based on needs assessment.
Goal 6.3: Develop and implement a comprehensive and college wide plan for equipment and
facilities purchases, updates and maintenance.
Goal 6.4: Provide technology training opportunities for faculty and staff.
Goal 6.5: Develop and implement a comprehensive plan for safety and security at all college
facilities.
Appendix 8
Grays Harbor College
Template for Strategic Planning 2006-2008
Program:
Administrator:
Dean:
Staff:
Faculty:
Full-time
Part-time
History and Mission: Please provide a brief history of this program and its mission. Include enrollment trends during the
last three years (2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05) with an analysis of significant increases or decreases.
Assessment (DSAs and/or Program Review): When was the program last reviewed (if applicable), and what were the
recommendations? How are /DSAs assessed? Please provide status and data.
Staffing: Is current staffing (including faculty) level adequate to support this program? What staffing needs do you
anticipate in the next two years?
Equipment/Technology: Is current equipment and technology adequate to support the program? What equipment/technology
needs do you foresee during the next two years?
Achievement of Previous Year’s Goals/Strategies: [This may not be applicable until the second year of using this process.]
Future of the Program: What are the short-term (1-3 years) and long-term (3-10 years) goals for this program? How do
these relate to the college’s vision, mission, and values?
Goals and Strategies for the next two years: Beginning on the next page is the matrix that contains the six Strategic
Directions and 26 College-wide Goals, which will guide the decisions, strategies, and resource allocation during the next two
years. Under each goal, if applicable, develop strategies that are specific and measurable, including who is responsible,
collaborators, assessment measures, a timeline for completion, and estimated budget impact (if any). Strategies will be
assessed at the end of one year but may be continued through the second year or beyond.
Some helpful suggestions for filling in the matrix:
1. Write specific, measurable, strategies (actions) that your program will take during the next two years toward the
fulfillment of any one or more of the 26 goals. Every program at the college will be working to take us forward in the six
Strategic Directions.
2. You are not expected to write a strategy for every goal! But you may have more than one strategy under a single goal.
3. Many goals will not have a “budget impact” beyond the cost of daily operations; others will need to be funded in order to
become actionable. These will be considered by the executive team and the budget development committee. Not all
initiatives can be funded, but this document is an opportunity to put your ideas, needs, and plans into writing so that they can
be discussed in the context of the overall picture of the college—and its mission and vision. Do not include equipment and
staff that are already part of your budget.
4. Remember that these Strategic Directions, Goals, and the strategies that you write are for the next two years (July 1,
2006 to June 30, 2008). You do not have to do everything at once, and your timelines should reflect this two year period.
5. At the end of the first year (June 30, 2007), we will assess the progress on all strategies, and we will also have an
opportunity to ask whether all the strategies are still relevant and whether circumstances have changed requiring us to write
new strategies.
6. Strategies should be written as statements of action.
Matrix for Strategic Planning 2006-2008 – Grays Harbor College
STRATEGIC DIRECTION 1: Instructional Programs
Evaluate program offerings, scheduling, and resources across the district in order to formulate a comprehensive plan to meet the needs of our students
and communities while promoting educational excellence in teaching and learning in accordance with the Desired Student Abilities.
GOAL 1.1: Develop and implement a system to evaluate all instructional programs to identify community needs for new programs, growth, continued
status, or possible elimination.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 1.2: Create a class schedule that is more flexible and provides options for the diverse community of students in our district.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 1.3: Expand faculty professional development opportunities that enhance teaching and learning.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
GOAL 1.4 Explore and implement ways to improve articulation with K-12 and 4-year colleges.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 1.5: Support innovation and excellence in programming in alignment with the Desired Student Abilities.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
STRATEGIC DIRECTION 2: College Climate and Staffing
Evaluate and enhance college climate by providing effective leadership and promoting productive and satisfying relationships among constituencies.
GOAL 2.1: Support professional development for all constituencies, including team training and leadership development.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 2.2: Develop and implement a plan for staffing based on need, as made evident through data and information.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 2.3: Increase communication and collaboration among constituent groups to provide an environment in which all people feel respected and valued.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 2.4: Increase coordination between internal departments.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
GOAL 2.5: Enhance appreciation for the richness of diversity through hiring, student outreach, professional development opportunities, and workshops.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
STRATEGIC DIRECTION 3: Communications and Outreach
Develop and implement a comprehensive (internal and external) communications and outreach plan to increase student and community access and
enrollments, and to communicate a positive image of the college to the communities it serves.
GOAL 3.1: Design and implement systems that increase awareness, outreach and collaboration with K-12 constituents including district boards,
administration, staff and students.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 3.2: Continue to foster opportunities for cultural growth and awareness among students, staff and the community.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 3.3: Develop systems to build and strengthen communication and partnerships with the larger community including nonprofit organizations, labor,
industry, government agencies, colleges and universities, and community and service groups.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 3.4: Assess and improve communication systems for engaging staff, students, and community, contributing to the promotion of a positive image of
GHC.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 3.5: Design and implement systems that identify and enhance communication with underserved and untapped populations.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
STRATEGIC DIRECTION 4: Resources and Budget
Align budget, resource allocation, operations, and decision-making with the Strategic Plan and the mission of the college.
GOAL 4.1: Create an environment that ensures participation and communication regarding the budget process.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 4.2: Explore, identify and implement options for alternative resources to support the college and its mission.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 4.3: Explore, refine, and develop a plan to increase scholarship opportunities.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
STRATEGIC DIRECTION 5: Student Services
Develop and implement a plan for the enhancement of student services and programs to support success for current and prospective students.
GOAL 5.1: Develop and implement a student centered plan to improve advising and entry services for all students, including students at outreach
campuses and distance education students.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 5.2: Develop support systems for non-traditional student groups (i.e., middle-aged and seniors, Hispanic population and other underserved
groups).
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 5.3: Provide more opportunities to enhance student learning experiences and social development through student activities outside of the
classroom.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
STRATEGIC DIRECTION 6: Technology/Equipment/Facilities
Develop and communicate a comprehensive, college-wide vision for the integration of technology, equipment and facilities including appropriate training
for all staff.
GOAL 6.1: Develop and implement a process for assessing instructional and administrative technology needs.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 6.2: Develop and implement a comprehensive and college wide plan for technology purchases, updates and maintenance, based on needs
assessment.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
MEASURES
GOAL 6.3: Develop and implement a comprehensive and college wide plan for equipment and facilities purchases, updates and maintenance.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
GOAL 6.4: Provide technology training opportunities for faculty and staff.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
GOAL 6.5: Develop and implement a comprehensive plan for safety and security at all college facilities.
STRATEGY
RESPONSIBILITY
COLLABORATORS
ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
TIMELINE
BUDGET IMPACT
Appendix 9
GHC’s Plan for Educational Assessment
GHC’s Plan for Educational Assessment is a comprehensive, campus-wide system of evaluation which requires assessment, documentation, and analysis of
student learning at the course, program and institutional levels and allocates resources to meet this requirement. The Plan contains the following components:
•
Articulation of Student Learning Outcomes - A syllabi development process links course outcomes to student learning outcomes (Desired Student
Abilities) and rates the emphasis for each Desired Student Ability in every course. Tracking and documentation is maintained by the Office of
Institutional Research and the Office of the Vice President. A database system allows for analysis of this data at the instructor, course, division, and
program level.
•
Assessment of Student Outcomes (3-year cycle) - A three-year ongoing Assessment Cycle has been established for the appraisal of student work
leading to certificates and degrees. Each Desired Student Ability is assessed over a three-quarter period involving three phases: development of the
Assessment Matrix; piloting the assessment across the division and collecting student work; and completion of an Assessment Analysis. Divisions begin
assessment of a new Desired Student Ability each quarter. The Office for Institutional Research is responsible for monitoring and assisting division
faculty as they complete this process.
•
Assessment of Institutional Effectiveness - An annual Institutional Effectiveness Report provides faculty, staff, and administration with multiple
indicators for the evaluation of student learning and the effectiveness of programs and services. The report is based on indicators of effectiveness
which have been developed by the Board of Trustees to measure the college’s success at meeting GHC’s Priority Goals. A campus-wide committee
analyzes the report and develops an annual Plan for Improvement to address any weaknesses revealed. Thorough analysis of student learning at Grays
Harbor College is based on data from many diverse sources including student work, a comprehensive Data Warehouse system linking student outcomes
with employment; national and locally developed surveys designed to assess the perception of current students and graduates; Employer Needs
Assessments; and data provided through the community colleges’ statewide student management system. The Office for Institutional Research is
responsible for conducting institutional assessment activities and the data is analyzed by all campus constituencies.
•
Allocation of Resources – Funding to support changes based on assessment is available through multiple sources: the institutional operating budget,
state allocation, one-time funding, and since 2004-05, grant funds under the Title III Strengthening Institutions grant. Divisions submit and prioritize
budget requests through the budget development process. Funding requests must be clearly linked to improvements in teaching and student learning.
In addition, dedicated funding is available to address Improvement Objectives that have been identified in the Plan for Improvement. The State Board
for Community and Technical Colleges provides each college in the system with a state allocation to support Outcomes Assessment projects. Funding
for special projects related to specific outcomes, i.e., diversity/cultural awareness, can also be requested from committees responsible for that outcome.
Articulation of Student Learning Outcomes
In 1999 the campus community adopted five Desired Student Abilities as general education outcomes for all students at Grays Harbor College. These general
education outcomes are designed to foster student development in the following competencies: Disciplinary Learning, Literacy, Critical Thinking, Social
and Personal Responsibility, and Information Use. These Desired Student Abilities were reviewed and reaffirmed by faculty, staff, and administration in the
2001-2002 academic year.
During fall 2003 faculty developed objectives for each of the Desired Student Abilities to more specifically answer the question - “What will students know or
be able to do when they have achieved each of the Desired Student Abilities?” These objectives serve as the framework for assessment and faculty may add
division-specific objectives as appropriate.
Assessment of Student Outcomes (2003 - 2006)
The objectives provide the foundation for a three-year cycle of systematic and continuous assessment of each of the five Desired Student Abilities that GHC
has established as student learning outcomes. Assessment will take place at the division level with each division following a develop, pilot, analyze, revise,
continue format:
Develop
During the development phase each division will discuss the extent to which the division teaches and assesses the Desired Student Ability. By the end
of the quarter, an Assessment Matrix will be completed that outlines the performance criteria to be evaluated, the strategies that will be used and the
assessment method. Using the objectives established for each of the Desired Student Abilities at the fall kick-off, as well as any appropriate divisionspecific objectives, faculty identify performance criteria and develop assessment strategies and instruments that will demonstrate student achievement
of the DSA.
Pilot
Within the relevant courses identified by the division, the assessment instruments are administered to measure student achievement of the assigned
Desired Student Ability.
Analyze
Each division will analyze the data gathered from the assessment activity and complete the final two sections of the Assessment Matrix –
recommendations and actions taken. In addition, an Assessment Analysis template has been developed to provide an easy, consistent format to
document the year-long process, evaluate the successes and challenges revealed, and identify indicated changes.
Revise
Recommended changes in teaching, curriculum, program outcomes, and/or processes the division believes will result in higher student achievement of
the Desired Student Ability are identified and implemented. Such changes are to be documented with specific timelines established to assess the effect
of the changes on student outcomes.
Continue
Each division will begin the development phase for a new Desired Student Ability each academic quarter. Members of the Outcomes Assessment
Committee and Administrative team were assigned as mentors to attend division meetings and serve as a resource for faculty as they work through the
assessment cycle.
Assessment Cycle--Year One
Divisions chose one of the Desired Student Abilities to begin the assessment cycle for fall quarter 2003. Once it was determined where each division would
start, a 3-year assessment cycle was established. This cycle ensures that the assessment process will be comprehensive and useful. The first year in this process
culminated in reports from divisions that described an entire sequence (develop, pilot, analyze, revise) for each specific Desired Student Ability.
Assessment Cycle--Year Two
By the end of spring quarter 2004, each division had completed the full assessment cycle for the Desired Student Ability they were assigned in Fall 2003.
During Fall 2004, divisions will be completing the analysis phase for the DSA they began winter quarter, piloting assessments developed last spring for their
third DSA, and developing the matrix for assessment of a fourth DSA. In order to facilitate learning from each other, faculty have been provided with a list of
all of the objectives used by divisions in 2003-04 to assess the five Desired Student Abilities and a summary of each divisions assessment, findings and
recommendations. Every faculty member has a copy of the 3-year assessment cycle grid identifying the phase for each division in each quarter so that faculty
can collaborate with colleagues.
SCCC was not included as a separate division within the 3-year Assessment Plan, but will begin this process with the 2004-05 academic year. Faculty
members from all programs at SCCC will assess the same agreed upon DSA and will follow the develop, pilot, analyze process used on the main campus.
They will complete the cycle for one DSA each year rather than beginning a new one each quarter due to a much heavier teaching load compared to on-campus
faculty.
Assessment Cycle--Year Three
By the 2005-06 academic year all divisions had completed development and pilot phases for each of the Desired Student Abilities and were in the analysis or
revision phases of the assessment cycle. For those DSA’s earliest in the cycle, divisions were re-analyzing based on assessments that were repeated following
implemented changes.
Allocation of Resources
GHC receives an annual allocation of $54,000 from the State Board for Community & Technical Colleges for outcomes assessment. These funds are used for
assessment projects at the classroom, program and institutional level; professional development and travel for faculty and staff related to assessment;
compensation for the outcomes assessment faculty liaison; and for support staff in the Office of Institutional Research. A half-time data technician was added
to the staff in the 2003-2004 academic year to assist with institutional research and assessment.
In 2003-04 each of the seven divisions received a stipend of $2000 to support implementation of the Plan for Educational Assessment. Those funds were used
in a variety of ways including faculty development, attendance at conferences, compensation for individual faculty leadership, division retreats, and additional
clerical support.
Through the annual budget development process, divisions submit and prioritize budget requests as needed to support changes based on assessment data and
analysis. During the 2004-05 budget development process, one-time funding of $100,000 was set aside to address the 2004-05 Improvement Objectives.
$50,000 of that total was allocated to Instruction to address the Improvement Objectives and to provide resources to implement the recommendations resulting
from assessment analysis. The other $100,000 was set aside for strategic planning and future initiatives. In 2005-06, $200,000 was allocated for the 2005-06
Improvement Objectives with $87,000 of that specified for instructional improvement.
Assessment Cycle 2003 - 2006
All Divisions
Appendix 10
All Divisions
Develop
Pilot
Fall
2003
Winter
2004
Spring
2004
Fall
2004
Winter
2005
Spring
2005
DISC. LRN. –
Math /Science
LITERACY –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
CRIT. THNK. –
Humanities &
Nursing
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Industrial Tech
INFO. USE Business
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Math /Science
LITERACY –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
CRIT. THNK. –
Humanities &
Nursing
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Industrial Tech
INFO. USE Business
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Humanities &
Nursing
LITERACY –
Industrial Tech
CRIT. THNK. –
Business
SOC.& PERS.
RES. – Math
/Science
INFO. USE –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
LITERACY –
Humanities &
Nursing
CRIT. THNK. –
Industrial Tech
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Business
INFO. USE –
Math /Science
DISC. LRN. –
Humanities &
Nursing
LITERACY –
Industrial Tech
CRIT. THNK. –
Business
SOC.& PERS.
RES. – Math
/Science
INFO. USE –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
DISC. LRN. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
LITERACY –
Humanities &
Nursing
CRIT. THNK. –
Industrial Tech
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Business
INFO. USE –
Math /Science
1 of 3
Fall
2005
Winter
2006
Spring
2006
All Divisions
Analyze
Fall
2003
Winter
2004
Spring
2004
Fall
2004
Winter
2005
Spring
2005
Fall
2005
Winter
2006
Spring
2006
DISC. LRN. –
Math /Science
LITERACY –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
CRIT. THNK. –
Humanities &
Nursing
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Industrial Tech
INFO. USE Business
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Math /Science
LITERACY –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
CRIT. THNK. –
Humanities &
Nursing
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Industrial Tech
INFO. USE –
Business
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Humanities &
Nursing
LITERACY –
Industrial Tech
CRIT. THNK. –
Business
SOC.& PERS.
RES. – Math
/Science
INFO. USE –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
DISC. LRN. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
LITERACY –
Humanities &
Nursing
CRIT. THNK. –
Industrial Tech
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Business
INFO. USE –
Math /Science
DISC. LRN. –
Humanities &
Nursing
LITERACY –
Industrial Tech
CRIT. THNK. –
Business
SOC.& PERS.
RES. – Math
/Science
INFO. USE –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
DISC. LRN. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
LITERACY –
Humanities &
Nursing
CRIT. THNK. –
Industrial Tech
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Business
INFO. USE –
Math /Science
2 of 3
All Divisions
Revise
Fall
2003
Winter
2004
Spring
2004
Fall
2004
Winter
2005
Spring
2005
Fall
2005
Winter
2006
Spring
2006
DISC. LRN. –
Math /Science
LITERACY –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
CRIT. THNK. –
Humanities &
Nursing
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Industrial Tech
INFO. USE Business
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Math /Science
LITERACY –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
CRIT. THNK. –
Humanities &
Nursing
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Industrial Tech
INFO. USE –
Business
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Business
LITERACY –
Math /Science
CRIT. THNK. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Humanities &
Nursing
INFO. USE –
Industrial Tech
DISC. LRN. –
Humanities &
Nursing
LITERACY –
Industrial Tech
CRIT. THNK. –
Business
SOC.& PERS.
RES. – Math
/Science
INFO. USE –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
DISC. LRN. –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
LITERACY –
Humanities &
Nursing
CRIT. THNK. –
Industrial Tech
SOC.& PERS.
RES. –
Business
INFO. USE –
Math /Science
DISC. LRN. –
Humanities &
Nursing
LITERACY –
Industrial Tech
CRIT. THNK. –
Business
SOC.& PERS.
RES. – Math
/Science
INFO. USE –
Social
Science/PE &
Dev Ed/Basic Ed
3 of 3
Appendix 11
GRAYS HARBOR COLLEGE
Board Policy
Subject: Vision, Mission, Values, Desired Student Abilities
Board Policy Number: 106
Page 1 of 1
Date adopted: 1/17/06
The following are the Vision, Mission, Values, and Desired Student Abilities for Grays Harbor College:
VISION STATEMENT:
Grays Harbor College is committed to being the premier choice for excellence in education, training, and
services, responsive to the diverse needs of our communities.
MISSION STATEMENT:
Grays Harbor College is a student-centered institution that inspires academic achievement, prepares an
excellent workforce, and fosters personal growth by providing outstanding educational and cultural
opportunities for improving lives in a global community.
VALUES:
Accessibility
Community
Diversity
Excellence
Integrity
Learning
Respect
Success
Leadership
DESIRED STUDENT ABILITIES:
Competency in the Disciplines
Literacy
Critical Thinking
Social and Personal Responsibility
Information Use
The college will develop a strategic plan that is reflective of the stated values, and works within the
mission to strive for accomplishment of the vision and desired student abilities of Grays Harbor College.
This strategic plan will be monitored through periodic reports to the Board of Trustees.
Appendix 12 – GHC Desired Student Abilities
Grays Harbor College Desired Student Abilities
Competency in the Disciplines
Knowledge of content in prerequisite or transfer courses, as well as preparation for a career.
Objectives:
Each division/program to establish objectives and performance criteria relative to
their disciplines.
Literacy
Skills in reading, writing, speaking, listening, and quantifying, as well as awareness and
appreciation of learning styles and life-long learning options.
Objectives:
1. Write clearly and effectively.
2. Demonstrate skills in mathematic reasoning and application.
3. Present ideas and information clearly and appropriately in speaking to others.
4. Demonstrate literal and inferential reading skills for comprehension and
vocabulary development.
Critical Thinking
Competency in analysis, synthesis, problem solving, decision making, creative exploration, and
formulation of an aesthetic response.
Objectives:
1. Analyze ideas objectively using established criteria.
2. Solve problems by combining and applying knowledge from multiple sources.
3. Evaluate a proposed solution using appropriate criteria.
Social and Personal Responsibility
Awareness of and responsiveness to diversity and commonality among cultures, multiplicity of
perspectives, ethical behaviors, and health and wellness issues.
Objectives:
1. Demonstrate awareness of and responsiveness to diversity and commonality
among cultures.
2. Recognize ethical responsibilities in a global society.
3. Develop an appreciation for good health habits and physical fitness.
Information Use
Skills in accessing and evaluating information resources including campus resources, awareness
of the role of information resources in making sound decisions, and command of the skills
required to use appropriate technologies effectively.
Objectives:
1. Demonstrate an awareness of the role of information resources in making
sound decisions.
2. Demonstrate the skills needed to access appropriate information resources.
3. Evaluate multiple sources of information for quality and relevance.
Appendix 13 – Title III Faculty Projects Funded
TITLE III FACULTY DEVELOPMENT
Number
Department
Name
Last Name
First Name
1
Roush
Adrienne
Library
Curriculum revision of linked Library/English course for Fall 2005
Summer 2005
$509.76
2
Winsor
Shiloh
Dev Ed
Curriculum revision of linked Library/English course for Fall 2005
Summer 2005
$509.76
3
Ibrahim
Mohammad
Science/Math
Curriculum development VR labs
Summer 2005
$1,274.40
4
Kuester
Tom
Science/Math
Math 98 guide for PT instructors & students
Summer 2005
$637.20
5
Carter
Diane
Science/Math
Curriculum development for new Bio 208 labs
Summer 2005
$1,274.40
6
Swan
Cal
Industrial Tech
Curriculum revision of Carpentry Class assignments
Summer 2005
$637.20
7
Buisman
Brion
Industrial Tech
Curriculum development of new Diesel Technology courses
Summer 2005
$1,274.40
8
Lerych
Lynne
Humanities
Curriculum revision of Engl 95 & Engl 101
Fall 2005
$637.20
9
DeBoer
Allison
Humanities
Curriculum revision of Engl 95 & Engl 101
Fall 2005
$637.20
10
Bergstrom
Teah
SCCC
Development of GED test taking resource pamphlet
Fall 2005
$637.20
13
Ashe
Bobbi
SCCC
College Reading and Learning Association Conference
Fall 2005
$1,114.32
14
Bowers
Linda
SCCC
College Reading and Learning Association Conference
Fall 2005
$1,270.95
15
Sandgren
Erik
Humanities
Humanities Conference
Fall 2005
$125.00
16
Lerych
Lynne
Humanities
Humanities Conference
Fall 2005
$125.00
17
Lerych
Jacek
Humanities
Humanities Conference
Fall 2005
$125.00
18
Winsor
Shiloh
Dev Ed
Humanities Conference
Fall 2005
$125.00
19
Cavin
Darby
Humanities
Humanities Conference
Fall 2005
$125.00
20
Larson
Dale
Humanities
Humanities Conference
Fall 2005
$125.00
11
Hanson
Diane
Dev Ed
International Reading Conference
Spring 2005
$894.30
12
Barker
Kathy
Dev Ed
International Reading Conference
Spring 2005
$1,831.45
21
Barker
Kathy
Dev Ed
NADE Conference (travel costs estimated)
Winter 2006
$845.00
22
Laughery
Laurie
Dev Ed
NADE Conference (travel costs estimated)
Winter 2006
$845.00
Total
Project Description
QuarterYear
Amount
$15,579.74
Appendix 14 GHC Committees and Changes
GHC Committees
2001-02 Committees
AA Degree
Academic Review
Advising
Calendar
Computer & Related Technologies Task Force
Cultural Events
Environmental Design
Faculty Excellence
Human Resources
Human Subjects
Legislative
Library Advisory
Model Watershed
Multi-Culture
Outcomes
President’s Cabinet
Safety
Scholarship
Staff Development and Training
Student Services Council
Technology Fee
Wellness
Campus committees appointed membership:
Dismissal Review
Division Chairs
Instructional Council
President’s Cabinet
Sabbatical Selection
Tenure Review
2002-03
Deleted Model Watershed
2003-04
Added Diversity (formerly Multi-Culture)
Deleted Multi-Culture
2004-05
Added Arts Commission
Added Bishop Center Events
Added 2004-05 Budget
Added Celebration
Appendix 14 GHC Committees and Changes
Deleted Environmental Design
Added Strategic Planning
2005-06
Added Enrollment Management
Added Speaker
Appendix 15 – Trustees’ Biographies
Grays Harbor College Board of Trustees
CAROL CARLSTAD
• Appointed October 2000
• Board Chair 2004-05
• Vice President, The Bank of the Pacific
• Past-president, Montesano Chamber of Commerce
• Past President and Board Member, Montesano Community Education
• Leadership roles in several community and school organizations
• Three children
• 306 Wilder Lane, Montesano, WA 98563, (360) 533-8873, ext. 1226,
ccarlstad@thebankofpacific.com
REBECCA CHAFFEE
• Appointed 2004
• Manager, Port of Willapa Harbor
• Former Public Works Director, City of Raymond
• Numerous community service and improvement projects for North Pacific County
• University of Washington
• Spouse: Gordon
• Two sons, one daughter
• 10 Washington Cemetery Road, Raymond, WA 98577, (360)942-3422 (h),
portofwh@willapabay.org
DENNIS COLWELL
• Appointed 1998
• Board Chair 2002-03
• Attorney (business & municipal law)
• Former chief civil deputy Prosecutor Grays Harbor County; WA State Bar Association
• Legislative committee
• Hearing officer for disciplinary board
• WA State Trial Lawyers
• Grays Harbor County Bar Association Past President
• United Way of Grays Harbor, Executive Committee, Drive Chairman, President, and
Admissions and Distributions Committee Chairman
• Board of Directors/President of Evergreen Counseling Center
• Grays Harbor Historical Seaport Authority
• Aberdeen Rotary
• Board of Directors of Grays Harbor Economic Development Council
• Attended Whitman College; University of WA, BA; University of WA Law School, J.D.
• Spouse: Dotty
• Three children
• 3343 Wishkah Road, Aberdeen, WA 98520, (360)533-5213 (h), (360)533-2865 (w),
dcolwell@izglaw.com
Appendix 15 – Trustees’ Biographies
JOHN WARRING
• Appointed 1999
• Clinical Biologist at Grays Harbor Community Hospital
• Board of Directors, United Food and Commercial Workers Union local 1001
• President, Grays Harbor Central Labor Council
• Exec. President, Grays Harbor & Pacific County Labor Councils 2001
• Committee Member, Grays Harbor Economic Development Council
• Grays Harbor Democratic Central Committee
• Advisory Committee, From Dreams to Realities: Diversify Rural Economies of the
Pacific Northwest
• Co-chairman, Yes! Stafford Creek in 1994
• Labor Representative, Pacific Mountain Private Industry Council
• Grays Harbor College Workforce Training Advisory Committee
• Coalition for a Livable WA
• University of Wisconsin Madison, BS in Medical Microbiology
• 235 N. River Road, Cosmopolis, WA 98537, (360)532-2643, ghaflcio@techline.com
FAWN SHARP-MALVINI
• Appointed 2004
• Reservation attorney, lead counsel, Quinault Indian Nation
• Member, Board of Governors for State Bar Association
• Co-chair of National Congress of American Indians, Sovereignty Protection Initiative
• AA degree, Grays Harbor College 1988
• BA Gonzaga University
• JD, University of Washington 1995
• Spouse: Daniel Malvini
• One son
• 579 Duck Lake Drive Se, Ocean Shores, WA 98569, fsharp@quinault.org
Grays Harbor College
Instruction Organizational Chart
2005-2006
President
Ed Brewster
VP for Instruction
Laurie Clary (interim)
Asst Dean ABE/ESL
Gary Thomasson
Coordinator ABE
Linda Blauvelt
Part Time
ABE/ESL Faculty
Simpson Education
Center
Whiteside Education
Center
Dean Extended Learning
Mark Reisman
Stafford Creek
Correction Center
Asst Dean of
Education
Catherine Slagle
Faculty
Liaison
Chris Aiken
Bobbie Ashe
Randy Bale
Teah Bergstrom
Director Education
Centers
Leon Lead
Columbia Education
Center
Riverview Education
Center
Dean Workforce Education
Mike Kelly
Business Division
John Clary
Jeff Farnam
Linda Kim
Sandra Miller
Guy Slover
Debra Sturgill
Indusrial Technology
Division Chair
Darrelyn Miller
Division Chair
Rod McDonald
Scott Blankenship
Brion Buisman
Ron Deaton
Denis Samson
Doug Jones
Cal Swan
Divisions
Humanities and
Communication
Science and Math
Director
Penny Woodruff
These Programs are
both Professional
Technical and
Transfer
Criminal Justice***
Social Science and
Physical Education
Developmental and
Basic Education
Division Chair
Tom Kuester
Division Chair
Chris Portmann
Division Chair
Diane Hanson
Allison DeBoer
Diane Carter
Gary Arthur
Kathy Barker
Brad Duffy
John Hillier
Ron Bradbury
(Criminal Justice***)
Trish Dutro
Dale Larson
Mohammad Ibrahim
Adrienne Roush
Laurie Laughery
Jacek Lerych
Russ Jones
Jack Dutro
(Human Services**)
Lynne Lerych
Jeff Koskela
Gary Murrell
Robert Richardson
Randy Lehr
(Natural Resources*)
Charlie Watkins
Mark Zerr
Nursing and Health
Sciences
Asst Dean Libary and
Media Services
Stan Horton
Divsion Chair
Darby Cavin
Dan Pratt
Linda Bowers
Doug Carley
Assistant to the VP
Maureen Espedal
Shiloh Winsor
Erik Sandgren
Jim Pringle
Lynn Siedenstrang
Human Services**
Corrie
Hightower
Natural Resources
Technology*
Sue Litster
Carol O'Neal
Monica Todd
Jane Wilson
Kelly Toda
3/7/2006
Grays Harbor College
Administrative Team
2006
Edward Brewster
President
Sandy Zelasko
Asst. to President
Laurie Clary (interim)
VP for Instruction
Arlene Torgerson
VP for Student Services
Maureen Espedal
Asst. to VP
Mike Kelly
Dean for Workforce. Ed.
Penny Woodruff
Director of Nursing
Mark Reisman
Dean for Extended Learning
Catherine Slagle
Asst. Dean for Corrections Ed.
Debbie Richters
Coord. Workforce Ed & Retraining
Web Stiles
PRI Coordinator
Darrell Solomon
Coord. Job Development & Placement
Leon Lead
Director of Off-Campus Community Ed
Margo Hood
Asst. to VP
Beate Wahl
Chief of Campus Operations/Aux. Services
Nancy Deverse
Assoc. Dean Student Services
Barbara Wood
Asst. Dean of Financial Services
Dave Halverstadt
Chief of Human Resources
Sandy Lloyd
Chief of Information Services
Arnel Blancas
Foundation & Resource Development Director
Jane Goldberg
Director of Public Relations
Melissa Barnes
Director of Advising & Counseling
Nadine Hibbs
Director of Financial Aid
Wes Peterson
Athletic Director
JEB Thornton
Director of Trio Grant
Gary Thomasson
Asst. Dean for ABE/GED
Keith Foster
VP for Administrative Services
Marcee Britton
Asst. Director for School-College Relations
& Coord. World Class Scholars & Tech
Prep
Debbie Reynvaan
Director for Institutional Research
Diane Smith
Director of Title III Grant
Julie Skokan
TRiO - Student Support Specialist
Sarah Aiken
Coord. Workfirst
Laurie Ratcliff
Coord. of The Learning Center
Linda Blauvelt
Coord. Adult Basic Education
Petra Shenk
Transition Services Facilitator
John Rajcich
Coord. Disability Support Services
Choul Wou
Coord. of Student Activities and
Leadership Programs
Stan Horton
Asst. Dean for Library Services
Updated 2/3/06
STANDARD SEVEN - FINANCE
SUMMARY REPORT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
YEAR 1
(00-01)
AMOUNT
YEAR 2
(01-02)
AMOUNT
YEAR 3
(02-03)
AMOUNT
YEAR 4
(03-04)
AMOUNT
YEAR 5
(04-05) **
AMOUNT
Revenues
16,844,188
17,783,564
17,352,752
19,068,565
19,311,476
Expenditures
16,189,322
17,013,836
16,643,409
18,132,726
18,817,003
654,866
769,728
709,343
935,839
494,473
Net Operational Excess (Deficit)
** Note: due to the timing of IPEDS reporting, FY04-05 data is based on "Draft" IPEDS data,
all other years are based on Actual IPEDS data.